大智度論 義疏通講 · 冊6Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Exposition Throughout · Vol. 6

Overview

As "Rejoicing and Dedication" opens, the speaker changes. In the preceding several chapters it was always the Buddha and Śakra Devānām Indra answering one another; in this chapter, however, it is the bodhisattva Maitreya who addresses the venerable Subhūti and sets up the thesis: there is a bodhisattva who 「隨喜福德，與一切眾生共之，迴向阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，以無所得故」 tr. "rejoices in merit, shares it with all beings, and dedicates it to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, with nothing to be attained"; compared with the giving, the upholding of morality, the cultivation of concentration, and the rejoicing of the śrāvakas, the pratyekabuddhas, and all beings, 「其福最上、第一、最妙、無上、無與等者」 tr. "this merit is supreme, foremost, most wondrous, unsurpassed, and without equal". Why is this so? The merit of the two vehicles and of beings is only 「為自調、為自淨、為自度」 tr. "for their own taming, for their own purification, for their own deliverance"; the bodhisattva's rejoicing and dedication arises for the sake of taming all beings, purifying all beings, and delivering all beings. Subhūti at once challenges this with ultimate emptiness: what is rejoiced in is the buddhas of the immeasurable worlds of the ten directions who have already passed into extinction, and all the roots of goodness in between, from their first arousing of the mind until the Dharma's end, all brought together, rejoiced in, and dedicated—but the past buddhas passed into extinction long ago; if one dedicates by grasping at marks, can it be found as it is thought of? Maitreya answers: 「取相，不得如所念」 tr. "grasping at marks, it cannot be found as it is thought of". Subhūti presses further: since the objects and the matters are without anything existent, is dedication that grasps at marks not 「將無顛倒」 tr. "surely inverted"? And so on to a string of five questions—「何等是緣？何等是事？」 tr. "What is the object? What is the matter?" What is awakening, what is the root of goodness, what is the mind of rejoicing that dedicates? The whole chapter then unfolds beneath this one question: why the merit of rejoicing is supreme, and by what the boundary between right dedication and wrong dedication is drawn. The chapter is named "Rejoicing and Dedication", and its eye lies in speaking of rejoicing and dedication together as a single dharma—rejoicing is the mind that arises in response to the goodness of others, and dedication is taking this mind toward the unsurpassed path; that the merit of this one mind outweighs all the merits made by the diligent work of body and speech—the pivot lies wholly in 「以無所得故」 tr. "with nothing to be attained".

The three rounds of the First Part set up 「但以心隨喜」 tr. "merely rejoicing with the mind", and then force out the question 「云何不墮顛倒」 tr. "how does one not fall into inversion?". Sūtra round ① is the setting up of the thesis and the challenge from ultimate emptiness described above. Treatise round ① first makes clear the meaning of the change of speakers: 「先七品中，佛命須菩提令說般若，中間帝釋多問、多說功德事」 tr. "in the preceding seven chapters the Buddha commanded Subhūti to speak prajñā, and in between Śakra asked much and spoke much of matters of merit"; now Maitreya, following the Buddha's original intent, again has Subhūti speak widely on prajñā by means of the dharma of rejoicing; he also checks Śakra's feeling of self-importance—「菩薩但以心隨喜，則勝聲聞、辟支佛、一切眾生布施等及諸無漏功德，何況華香、供養經卷等」 tr. "the bodhisattva, merely by rejoicing with the mind, surpasses the giving and so on of the śrāvakas, the pratyekabuddhas, and all beings, and all the merits without outflows—how much more flowers, incense, offerings to the scroll, and the like". It then explains the meaning of the merit of rejoicing: 「不勞身、口業作諸功德，但以心方便見他修福，隨而歡喜」 tr. "without labouring with the karma of body and speech to make merits, but merely, by the skilful means of the mind, seeing another cultivate merit and rejoicing accordingly"; apart from merit, humans and animals alike practise the three things; a person who cultivates merit is 「譬如熱時，清涼滿月，無不樂仰」 tr. "like the cool full moon in hot weather, which there is no one who does not delight in and look up to"; merit with outflows and merit without outflows are alike named merit; merit is the root of the bodhisattva, and human kings, heavenly kings, and even the buddhas are all born from it. As for sharing it with all beings: the substance of merit cannot be given to others, but the result can be given; because the cause is spoken of within the result, it is said 「福德與眾生共」 tr. "merit is shared with beings"; their own taming, their own purification, their own deliverance are explained by matching them to morality, concentration, and wisdom, and to the eightfold right path; as for speaking of delivering when in fact not all beings are delivered, it is like a great fire that always has the power to burn yet cannot burn because the firewood does not come near. At the end it explains the names object and matter, and determines the three inversions of ordinary people and the two inversions of trainees. In sūtra round ② Maitreya answers the challenge: those who have long practised the six perfections, made many offerings to the buddhas, planted roots of goodness, kept company with good friends, and learned well the dharma of the emptiness of specific marks are able, with regard to these objects and these matters, to dedicate without grasping at marks, by way of the non-dual dharma and the not-non-dual dharma, and so on up to the dharma that neither arises nor ceases; he also makes clear that this deep meaning 「不應為新學菩薩說」 tr. "should not be taught to bodhisattvas new to the training", for fear that their slight faith, delight, and pure mind would all be lost; and he himself raises the difficulty that the mind is exhausted, ceased, changed, and departed, and that two minds do not occur together. Treatise round ② answers with similes: iron, though hard and tough, becomes soft when it enters the furnace; the mind long in practice is tamed and pliant, and so can rejoice without marks; 「譬如鳥子，羽翼未成，不可逼令高翔；六翮成就，則能遠飛」 tr. "just as a fledgling whose wings are not yet grown cannot be forced to soar high, but once its six pinions are complete it can fly far"; therefore one who has newly aroused the mind is first taught rejoicing that grasps at marks, and gradually gains the power of skilful means; the mind is exhausted and ceases from thought to thought and enters the real mark of all dharmas, where there is no discrimination of this as the mind, this as the object, this as the matter—this is right dedication. In sūtra round ③ Śakra puts in a question: will a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind not be alarmed and afraid on hearing this matter? Subhūti, to complete what Maitreya has said, answers with not receiving prajñā, having much faith in and understanding of the emptinesses, always following good friends, and neither increasing nor decreasing on hearing of the deeds of Māra; the one who has newly aroused the mind brings together all the merits of the past buddhas—their 「斷生死道」 tr. "cutting off the path of birth and death" and the rest—and the roots of goodness of the four kinds of fields of merit, rejoices in them, and dedicates them; Maitreya asks further how one does not fall into the three inversions of perception, mind, and view, and Subhūti answers: one thinks of the buddhas and the saṅgha yet does not give rise to the thought of a buddha, the thought of a saṅgha, or the thought of roots of goodness, and in dedicating with this mind does not give rise to the thought of a mind either; the mind has the mark of exhaustion and cessation, and the dharma of the place to which one dedicates likewise has the mark of exhaustion and cessation and is empty of self-nature; to be able to know it thus is called 「真迴向」 tr. "true dedication"; and so on up to 「無有法能迴向法」 tr. "there is no dharma that can dedicate a dharma", because all dharmas are empty of self-nature. Treatise round ③ explains the circumstances of Śakra's renewed question, explains phrase by phrase the words of praise—cutting off the path, laying down the heavy burden, removing the thorn of the village—and makes clear that the mind 「入無常門，到法性中」 tr. "enters the gate of impermanence and arrives within the nature of dharmas", and within the nature of dharmas there is no discrimination; it also answers the difficulty that the earlier mind and the later mind arise and cease, and gathers everything into the true dedication that knows cessation and knows emptiness, and the right dedication in which, because nothing is done, there is no dharma that can dedicate a dharma.

The two rounds of the Last Part carry the boundary between right and wrong dedication through to the end, and then, with the weighing and the praise of the gods, gather up the fruit of the whole chapter. Sūtra round ④ turns to the mark of separation: the merit that arises is apart from the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, and the eighteen elements, and prajñā and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas all have the mark of separation; the merit of rejoicing is apart by its self-nature, the buddhas are apart from the buddha-nature, the roots of goodness are apart from the nature of roots of goodness, and one should practise thus the prajñāpāramitā of the mark of separation. One who wishes to dedicate the roots of goodness of the past buddhas who have passed into extinction should think thus: as is the mark of the buddhas' passing into extinction, so too is the mark of the roots of goodness; I dedicate with the mind, and the mark of this mind too is so—dedicating thus, one does not fall into the three inversions. Maitreya asks: without grasping at marks, how can one dedicate? Subhūti answers: in the prajñā one learns 「應有般若波羅蜜方便力」 tr. "there should be the power of skilful means of prajñāpāramitā"; within prajñā the buddhas are unfindable, the roots of goodness are unfindable, and the dedicating mind too is unfindable; dedication that grasps at marks and discriminates is not permitted by the buddhas—「譬如美食雜毒」 tr. "like fine food mixed with poison"; its good colour and good fragrance are craved by people, and a foolish person eats it with delight, but 「飯欲消時，受若死、若死等苦」 tr. "when the food is about to be digested, he suffers the pain of death or of what is equal to death"; one who does not truly receive, does not truly grasp the marks, does not truly recite and read, and does not understand the meaning within, and yet teaches others to rejoice and dedicate by grasping at marks, thereby slanders the Buddha; as for right dedication, 「如諸佛所知無上智慧」 tr. "as the buddhas know with their unsurpassed wisdom" the mark and nature of these roots of goodness, so too do I rejoice, so too do I dedicate. Treatise round ④ explains this: as the past buddhas entered nirvāṇa without remainder, without marks and without idle discourse, their nature forever quiescent, so too are the merit and the dedicating mind; 「有相是一邊，無相是一邊，離是二邊行中道，是諸佛實相」 tr. "having marks is one extreme, being without marks is one extreme; leaving these two extremes and walking the middle way is the real mark of the buddhas"; merit apart from prajñā cannot be dedicated, because one dharma is real and not deceptive, and the undeceiving path is prajñā; that the past buddhas are empty and non-existent and yet I engage in recollection, imagining, and discrimination about them—this is a great loss; the simile of the poisoned food is matched and explained phrase by phrase—the food is the merit of rejoicing, the poison is the afflictions of craving and views born of grasping at marks, the good colour is the blessed pleasures of humans and gods, the good fragrance is fame and power, and the foolish person is the bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind, grasps at marks, and has an attached mind; death, or what is equal to death, is explained in two ways; and at the end comes the brightest simile of the whole chapter: 「譬如射地，無不著時；若射餘物，或著、或不著」 tr. "just as when one shoots at the ground there is no time one does not hit, but if one shoots at other things one may hit or may not hit"—rejoice as the buddhas know, like shooting at the ground, which never fails to hit. Sūtra round ⑤ goes a layer further: form and so on up to the practice of constant equanimity and all dharmas are 「不繫欲界、不繫色界、不繫無色界」 tr. "not bound to the desire realm, not bound to the form realm, not bound to the formless realm", and a dharma that is not bound is not named by the three times; 「若法無生則無法，無法中不可迴向」 tr. "if a dharma is unarisen then there is no dharma, and within no dharma there can be no dedication"—dedicating thus, there is no mixing with poison; dedication that grasps at marks and attains a dharma is called wrong dedication, which the buddhas do not praise, and which cannot fulfil the six perfections and so on up to cannot attain awakening. Here the Buddha himself gives his approval, praising Subhūti, 「善哉！善哉！如汝所為，為作佛事」 tr. "Excellent! Excellent! What you have done is to do the Buddha's work", in that he has spoken for the bodhisattvas the dharma to which one should dedicate, by way of the signless, of non-attainment, of non-emergence, and so on up to the nature of dharmas, suchness, and the limit of reality; there follows a threefold weighing—that the beings of the three-thousand great-thousand world should practise the ten wholesome paths, the four dhyānas, and the five supernormal powers; that they should all become srota-āpanna and so on up to pratyekabuddhas, and a person make offerings to them for his whole life; that they should all arouse the mind of awakening, and beings as many as the sands of the Ganges make offerings for kalpas as many as the sands of the Ganges—none of this equals dedication with a mind not attached to the roots of goodness; from the heavens of the Four Heavenly Kings up to the Akaniṣṭha heaven the gods gather like clouds and praise the bodhisattva's 「最大迴向」 tr. "greatest dedication", which, because of the power of skilful means, with nothing to be attained, because of the signless dharma, because of the dharma without awareness, 「不墮二法」 tr. "does not fall into dual dharmas"; the Buddha tells the gods: rejoicing that grasps at marks, with something to be attained, and brings things together, compared with the supreme rejoicing of nothing to be attained, of non-dual dharmas, of the signless dharma, falls short of it in merit by a hundred thousand koṭi times; Subhūti asks what is the supreme rejoicing, and the Buddha answers: toward the dharmas of the three times, neither grasping nor relinquishing, neither thinking of nor not thinking of, neither finding nor not finding; as are the mark of suchness, the nature of dharmas, the abiding of dharmas, and the position of dharmas, so too do I rejoice and dedicate; and further he teaches the contemplation of rejoicing in which 「布施與解脫等」 tr. "giving is equal to liberation", and so on up to the marks of all dharmas all being equal to liberation, 「不生不滅故」 tr. "because they neither arise nor cease"; one who accomplishes the merit of this rejoicing 「當疾得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "shall quickly attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". Treatise round ⑤ brings the whole chapter to a close: form going beyond the three realms is itself the real mark of form; because it is unarisen, it is without anything existent—this is called dedication without the mixing of poison, the signless dedication of non-attainment; 「菩薩禮佛有三品：一者、悔過品，二者、隨喜迴向品，三者、勸請諸佛品」 tr. "the bodhisattva's worship of the Buddha has three sections: first, the section on repentance; second, the section on rejoicing and dedication; third, the section on entreating the buddhas", and this chapter is precisely the extended account of one of these three sections; the signless is of three kinds—「假名相」 tr. "the mark of provisional names", 「法相」 tr. "the mark of dharmas", 「無相相」 tr. "the mark of the signless"—and because one is apart from the three kinds of marks it is called signless; from the signless there follow non-attainment, non-emergence, neither stain nor purity, all the way to being the same as the nature of dharmas, suchness, and the limit of reality; three rounds of question and answer explain why some gods come in great numbers and others in few, the brief account of the supreme dedication (「果報常無盡故」 tr. "because its result is forever inexhaustible"), and how all dharmas are equal to liberation (the wisdom-eye contemplates all dharmas as false, 「唯涅槃為實」 tr. "only nirvāṇa is real", and therefore 「解脫為貴，上智慧貴解脫」 tr. "liberation is to be prized; superior wisdom prizes liberation"); at the end it judges with five pairs of difference—practising the six perfections for immeasurable kalpas with dharmas of something to be attained does not equal merely rejoicing with the mind by way of dharmas of nothing to be attained: formerly measurable, now immeasurable; formerly exhaustible, now inexhaustible; formerly mixed with poison, now without poison; formerly following birth and death, now following nirvāṇa; formerly uncertain, now sure to make a buddha quickly.

For the whole chapter the sūtra text and the treatise's explanation each come in five rounds, sūtra and treatise advancing in alternation; all within fascicle sixty-one, the chapter is divided at the end of the treatise's third round of explanation and the head of the fourth round of sūtra text into two arcs, the First Part and the Last Part. The First Part takes in the first three rounds—Maitreya's setting up of the thesis and the challenge from ultimate emptiness, the distinction between object and matter and the determination of the inversions, the deep meaning not taught to those new to the training, the simile of the fledgling's six pinions, how one who has newly aroused the mind dedicates rightly, and the mind entering the gate of impermanence and arriving within the nature of dharmas; the Last Part takes in the latter two rounds—the mark of separation and being apart by self-nature, the simile of the poisoned food and the simile of shooting at the ground, not being bound to the three realms and there being no dharma to dedicate, the Buddha's praise of doing the Buddha's work and the threefold weighing, the gods' praise of the greatest dedication, the contemplation of rejoicing that is equal to liberation, and the five pairs of difference, ending at the judgement of the four kinds of people. What the First Part lays out is the back-and-forth between ‘merely rejoicing with the mind—why is its merit supreme?’ and ‘a signless dharma—how can one rejoice?’; what the Last Part lays out is how the boundary between right and wrong dedication comes to rest in the two similes of the poisoned food and of shooting at the ground, and then, with the Buddha's own approval, is gathered into the supreme rejoicing.

Therefore, in reading each round of question and answer, one can ask at least three layers of questions. First, at which layer does this round's difficulty lodge—is it the difficulty on the side of the object, that the past buddhas are long extinct and that, grasping at marks, 「不得如所念」 tr. "it cannot be found as it is thought of"? Is it the difficulty on the side of the mind that takes the object, that the mind is exhausted and ceases from thought to thought and two minds do not occur together? Or is it the difficulty of the substance of dharmas, that dharmas are fundamentally unarisen and 「無法中不可迴向」 tr. "within no dharma there can be no dedication"? Second, by what does the one who answers judge right and wrong—grasping at marks is being mixed with poison, is slandering the Buddha, is falling into the three inversions; not grasping at marks is as the buddhas know, is shooting at the ground and never failing to hit, is not falling into dual dharmas. The standard of judgement is always the one phrase 「以無所得故」 tr. "with nothing to be attained". Third, with what kinds of similes does the treatise-author guide the two capacities, the deep and the shallow—for one who has newly aroused the mind, the gradual way of the fledgling's six pinions and of iron entering the furnace; for one long in practice, the warning of the poisoned food and the decision of shooting at the ground; and so on to the great fire that does not burn when the firewood is not near, and the drop of water that vanishes at once when it falls on hot iron—each has its proper place. Read on along these five rounds of dialogue, and one will come at last to the same place: that the merit of rejoicing and dedication is supreme and foremost lies not in the breadth of what is taken as object nor in the multitude of what is thought of, but in the one who rejoices grasping nothing at all—not the buddhas, not the roots of goodness, not his own mind: rejoice as the buddhas know, like shooting at the ground, which never fails to hit.

Reading On in the Order of the Treatise

Rejoicing and Dedication, First Part: The Merit of Rejoicing, Dedicated, Is Supreme and Foremost; Grasping at Marks, It Cannot Be Found as It Is Thought Of; How One Who Has Newly Aroused the Mind Rightly Dedicates

What Is Being Asked

This unit opens by changing the one who speaks the Dharma. In the preceding several chapters it was Śakra going back and forth with the Buddha and with Subhūti; as soon as this chapter opens, it is the bodhisattva Maitreya who sets out a thesis to Subhūti: the bodhisattva’s merit of rejoicing, shared with all beings, dedicated to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening, with nothing to be attained—its merit is 「最上、第一、最妙、無上、無與等」 tr. "supreme, foremost, most wondrous, unsurpassed, and without equal"—surpassing the giving, the keeping of morality, the cultivation of concentration, and the rejoicing of the śrāvakas, the pratyekabuddhas, and all beings. The treatise-author points out the intent of this change of scene: in the earlier seven chapters the Buddha commanded Subhūti to speak on prajñā, and in between Śakra asked much about matters of merit; now Maitreya, in accord with the Buddha’s original intent, wishes to have Subhūti 「因隨喜法廣說般若」 tr. "speak broadly on prajñā by way of the dharma of rejoicing". So although on its face the chapter’s title is ‘rejoicing and dedication’, this gate of the practice of merit, in its bones what it asks about is still prajñā: what rejoicing thinks of is buddhas long since passed into extinction and roots of goodness long since ceased; the object thought of is 「無所有」 tr. "without anything existent"—then, thinking of it by grasping at marks and dedicating by grasping at marks, can it be as it is thought of? If not, does one not fall into the three inversions of perception, of mind, and of view? And if all is ultimate emptiness, then what is the object, what is the matter, what is dedication?

So the whole unit unfolds around a dilemma: not grasping at marks, there seems to be no way to rejoice and dedicate; grasping at marks, one cannot find it as it is thought of, and on the contrary falls into inversion. Maitreya and Subhūti, one asking and one answering, draw this dilemma tight, and then it is untied along two roads—‘those who have long practised the six perfections are able to dedicate without grasping at marks’ and ‘those who have newly aroused the mind, through the two causes and conditions of sharp faculties and the good friend, are also fit for right dedication’; at the end it comes back to one pivotal sentence—the mind that thinks of the buddhas and of the roots of goodness is, thought after thought, exhausted, ceased, changed, and departed, enters together into the nature of dharmas, and is without discrimination: 「若能如是迴向，是為正迴向」 tr. "if one is able to dedicate in this way, this is right dedication". What the First Part establishes is exactly the skeleton of this ‘right dedication’.

Passage by Passage

1. Rejoicing and dedication set out as the thesis—its merit is supreme and foremost. Maitreya tells Subhūti: a bodhisattva-mahāsattva has the merit of rejoicing, 「與一切眾生共之」 tr. "shares it with all beings", dedicates it to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, 「以無所得故」 tr. "with nothing to be attained"; compared with the giving, the keeping of morality, the cultivation of concentration, and the rejoicing of the śrāvakas, the pratyekabuddhas, and all beings, its merit is supreme, foremost, most wondrous, unsurpassed, and without equal. This sentence is the general outline of the whole chapter: that rejoicing and dedication alone surpasses rests on three links, not one of which may be missing—rejoicing (the mind taking another’s goodness as its object), sharing with beings (not keeping the merit private), and nothing to be attained (not grasping at its marks). Everything in the chapter from here on is the unfolding and the testing of these three links.

2. The causes and conditions of its surpassing—their own taming, their own purification, their own deliverance, against arising for the deliverance of all beings. Why can rejoicing in the mind surpass diligent work of body and speech? The sūtra text itself states the causes and conditions: the two vehicles and beings cultivate goodness 「為自調、為自淨、為自度」 tr. "for their own taming, for their own purification, for their own deliverance", and what they cultivate is no more than the four foundations of mindfulness, and so on up to the eight limbs of the noble path, emptiness, signlessness, and non-action; the bodhisattva who rejoices and dedicates, holding this merit, 「為調一切眾生、為淨一切眾生、為度一切眾生故起」 tr. "arises for the taming of all beings, for the purification of all beings, for the deliverance of all beings". Victory and defeat lie not in how much or how little there is in the outward matter, but in how broad or narrow is the reach covered by the aroused mind: cultivated for one’s own person, the measure of merit is confined to that person; arising for all beings, the measure of merit is as broad as its object.

3. Subhūti’s broad question—all roots of goodness brought together and rejoiced in: can grasping at marks find it? Subhūti first spreads the object of rejoicing out to the widest: the buddhas who have passed into extinction in the immeasurable worlds of the ten directions, from the first arousing of the mind to attaining awakening, entering nirvāṇa without remainder, and on until the Dharma is exhausted—the roots of goodness in between, the roots of goodness corresponding to the six perfections, the roots of goodness of śrāvakas in training and beyond training, the five aggregates of the buddhas (morality, concentration, wisdom, liberation, and the knowledge and vision of liberation), omniscience, great kindness and great compassion, those who attain the path within the Dharma left behind, and the roots of goodness planted by other beings—all brought together, rejoiced in, and dedicated. Then one stitch draws it tight: one who practises the bodhisattva vehicle thinks, ‘I dedicate with this mind’; this is giving rise to a mind, having an object, having a matter—「若善男子取相迴向阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，如所念可得不」 tr. "if a good man grasps at marks and dedicates to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, can it be found as it is thought of?" The wider the object, the sharper the question of grasping at marks.

4. Maitreya’s answer—grasping at marks, it cannot be found as it is thought of. Maitreya’s answer is a single sentence: the mind of dedication is what takes the object, taking the matter as its object; 「若善男子取相，不得如所念」 tr. "if a good man grasps at marks, he does not find it as it is thought of". This is the first ruling of this unit: it is not saying that rejoicing and dedication cannot be practised, but that if it is practised by way of grasping at marks, what is thought of and what is found will surely not correspond—the roots of goodness of the buddhas that are thought of are fundamentally not things with marks; thinking of them by grasping at marks, what one thinks of is already not they. This ruling adds no explanation and leaves no room, precisely in order to drive the problem on to what follows—if one does not grasp at marks, how then is one to dedicate? The whole chapter turns on this one sentence.

5. The difficulty of inversion and the five questions of ‘what’. Subhūti at once presses the difficulty to the bottom: if the objects and the matters are without anything existent and one still rejoices and dedicates by grasping at marks, is this not the three inversions of perception, of mind, and of view—「無常謂常」 tr. "taking the impermanent as permanent", taking the impure as pure, suffering as pleasure, non-self as self? Conversely, if it is as the objects are and as the matters are (the objects and matters being fundamentally empty), then awakening too is so, the mind of dedication too is so, the six perfections and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas too are so—then 「何等是緣？何等是事？」 tr. "what is the object? what is the matter?" What is awakening, what are the roots of goodness, what is the dedication of the mind of rejoicing? These five ‘what’s are the eye of the question for the whole chapter: both sides are blocked off—grasping at marks falls into inversion, while not grasping at marks, subject and object both vanish, and there seems to be no way to dedicate. All that follows answers this.

6. The reason for the change of scene—Maitreya accords with the Buddha’s original intent. The treatise-author first explains why Maitreya is brought in as the questioner: in the earlier seven chapters the Buddha commanded Subhūti to speak on prajñā, and in between Śakra asked much and spoke much about matters of merit; now Maitreya, 「順佛本意，還欲令須菩提因隨喜法廣說般若波羅蜜」 tr. "according with the Buddha’s original intent, wishes again to have Subhūti speak broadly on prajñāpāramitā by way of the dharma of rejoicing". This sentence settles the character of the whole chapter: rejoicing and dedication is the entrance, prajñā is the true topic; wherever merit is discussed below, it should all be brought back to prajñā. Remember this placement when reading the chapter, and one understands why what follows tests merit layer upon layer with ultimate emptiness, and does not feel it to be a branch growing off the main stem.

7. Checking Śakra’s sense of his own abundance. The treatise-author adds a further reason from human feeling: Śakra, hearing that offering flowers, incense, music, banners, and canopies to prajñā brings very much merit, rejoiced deeply at his own good fortune that these things were ‘what only we are able to provide, not something renunciants possess’. Maitreya deliberately says to Subhūti that the bodhisattva, 「但以心隨喜」 tr. "only by rejoicing in the mind", surpasses the giving and the like of the śrāvakas, the pratyekabuddhas, and all beings, and all the merits without outflows—「何況華香、供養經卷等」 tr. "how much more flowers, incense, offerings to the scroll of the sūtra, and the like". This checks his sense of his own abundance: however grand offerings of outer things may be, they do not reach a single thought of the rejoicing mind—moving the centre of weight of merit from material things back to the ground of the mind.

8. The meaning of the merit of rejoicing—humans and animals share three things. What is the merit of rejoicing? 「不勞身、口業作諸功德，但以心方便見他修福，隨而歡喜」 tr. "without toiling with the karma of body and speech to make merits, only by the skilful means of the mind, seeing others cultivate merit and rejoicing along with them", thinking that among all beings those able to cultivate merit and practise the path are the most excellent. The treatise-author also brings out, from the reverse side, the weight of merit: apart from merit, humans and animals practise the same three things—「婬欲、飲食、戰鬪」 tr. "lust, eating and drinking, and fighting". What makes humans differ from birds and beasts lies exactly in being able to cultivate merit and practise the path; the mind of rejoicing is precisely the cherishing of, and gladness at, this point by which humans are human. So the gate of rejoicing is set at the lowest place—it needs neither the power of wealth nor the power of the body, only a single thought of a mind that sees goodness and is glad.

9. The simile of the cool full moon and the simile of the great gathering. Those who cultivate merit are revered and loved by all beings, and the treatise-author uses two similes in succession: as in hot weather, 「清涼滿月，無不樂仰」 tr. "the cool full moon—there is no one who does not delight to look up to it"; as when a great gathering is announced, with music and fine food all fully provided, and people near and far all gladly come. Both similes take the meaning of ‘not summoned, yet people come of themselves’—the way merit moves people does not wait to be proclaimed; like the coolness of the moon and the abundance of the gathering, beings naturally delight to draw near. This is also exactly why rejoicing is easy to practise: the goodness of others is in itself something to be glad at; rejoicing along with it follows the naturalness of the human mind. Of the two similes one is still and one is moving: the moon simile shows the coolness of virtue that can be looked up to, the gathering simile the abundance of merit that can be gone to—both are the spontaneous longing of beings.

10. Two kinds of merit—with outflows and without outflows are both called merit. The treatise-author sorts out the boundary of merit: merit is the causes and conditions of two kinds of happiness, worldly and world-transcending. The world-transcending: 「諸無漏法，雖無福報，能生福德，故名福德」 tr. "dharmas without outflows, though they have no reward of merit, are able to produce merit, and so are called merit"—dharmas without outflows do not bring about results within the three realms; why are they named merit? Because they are able to produce merit. Therefore 「有漏、無漏，通名福德」 tr. "with outflows and without outflows are both called merit". This sorting leaves room for the earlier ‘rejoicing surpasses all the merits without outflows’: what rejoicing takes as its object is not limited to goodness with outflows; the merits without outflows of the buddhas are also among what is rejoiced in.

11. Merit is the root of the bodhisattva. The treatise-author praises it head-on: merit is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva’s 「根本，能滿所願」 tr. "root, able to fulfil what he vows", praised by all the noble ones; the kings of humans, the wheel-turning sage kings, the kings of the gods, arhats, pratyekabuddhas, the buddhas, the World-Honored Ones, up to great kindness and great compassion, the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, omniscience of all kinds, and unobstructed sovereignty—「皆從福德中生」 tr. "all are born from merit". Of all the honoured and excellent positions and virtues, worldly and world-transcending, not one does not take merit as its foundation—so to rejoice in the merit of others is to rejoice in the causes of all the worthy and noble. This passage also says that merit is praised by the noble and disparaged by those without wisdom, which shows it to be exactly the watershed between the wise and the foolish.

12. Why the mind of rejoicing arises—the vow to give happiness and the feeling of companionship. Why is the bodhisattva glad on seeing others cultivate merit? The treatise-author gives two causes: first, the bodhisattva thinks to himself, ‘I ought to give happiness to all beings’; now, seeing beings able to practise merit by themselves, his vow is fulfilled, and so gladness arises in his mind; second, all beings who practise goodness are 「與我相似，是我同伴」 tr. "like me; they are my companions", and fellow travellers on the same path, seeing one another, rejoice. The former is the fulfilment of the mind of great compassion; the latter is the closeness of those who practise together—rejoicing is not the approval of an onlooker; it is one who vows seeing the vow fulfilled, one who practises seeing a fellow practitioner.

13. Shared with all beings—the result can be given; the cause is spoken of in the result. How is merit ‘shared with all beings’? The treatise-author states it directly: 「是福德不可得與一切眾生，而果報可與。」 tr. "This merit cannot be given to all beings, but its result can be given." The bodhisattva obtains the result of merit—clothing, food, and things of pleasure with which to benefit beings; a pure body and speech with which to teach the Dharma to beings; at the end becoming a Buddha and manifesting in the three things, with the major and minor marks and with light, to deliver immeasurable beings; after parinirvāṇa, the body broken into relics given to people for offerings so that they attain the path—this result can be given to all beings; 「以果中說因故」 tr. "because the cause is spoken of in the result", it is said that 「福德與眾生共」 tr. "merit is shared with beings". The substance of merit is bound to one’s own mind and cannot be transferred; what is called sharing is that the enjoyment of the result can be shared.

14. The substance of wholesome dharmas cannot be given to others. The treatise-author further proves it by reasoning: if merit could be given directly to others, 「諸佛從初發心所集福德盡可與人，然後更作」 tr. "the buddhas could give to people all the merit they have gathered since first arousing the mind, and then make more"—with the great compassion of the buddhas, how could there be something that could be given and yet is not given? It is evident that the substance of wholesome dharmas fundamentally cannot be given to others; what is given now is 「無畏、無惱」 tr. "fearlessness and freedom from vexation"—because of merit one neither encroaches upon nor vexes people, and beings are able to enjoy peace and security. This passage settles the words ‘shares it’, from an emotional sharing, into a strict matter, in cause and effect, of what can be given and what cannot. What can be given is given without stinting; what cannot be given is known as it truly is—the vow to share is not lessened by this, but made true by it.

15. The meaning of nothing to be attained, and three explanations of their own taming, purification, and deliverance. 「無所得故」 tr. "Because of nothing to be attained"—the meaning is as explained before: rejoicing and dedication must take nothing to be attained as its seal, and this is the thread running through the chapter. Why the merit of rejoicing is the most excellent among the three kinds of merit—the cause of its surpassing is that the two vehicles 「皆為自調、自淨、自度」 tr. "all act for their own taming, their own purification, their own deliverance": keeping morality is their own taming, cultivating dhyāna is their own purification, wisdom is their own deliverance; again, it is matched with the eight limbs of the noble path—their own taming is right speech, right action, and right livelihood; their own purification is right mindfulness and right concentration; their own deliverance is right view, right thought, and right effort; again, because of giving, their own taming; because of keeping morality, their own purification; because of cultivating concentration, their own deliverance. The three layers of matching all make clear that the goodness of the two vehicles does not go beyond benefiting one’s own person, while the bodhisattva rejoices for all beings, and so it surpasses.

16. Question and answer one—since in fact not all beings are delivered, why say it surpasses? The questioner objects: in fact not all beings have been delivered; why say ‘it surpasses because it is for the deliverance of all beings’? The answer: 「諸佛菩薩功德力能度一切眾生，但以眾生無和合因緣故」 tr. "the power of the merits of the buddhas and bodhisattvas is able to deliver all beings; it is only because beings lack the coming together of causes and conditions"—as a great fire always has the power to burn, 「薪不近，故不得燒，近則能燒」 tr. "the firewood is not near, so it cannot burn it; when it is near, it can burn it". The surpassing lies in the power to deliver extending to all, not in the number already delivered; that beings are not delivered is that the occasion has not come together, not that the power leaves anything out. Taking fire as a simile for the power: the power is always present, and burning waits on the firewood; the vow-power to deliver beings is likewise always present, and deliverance waits on the conditions.

17. The difficulty of ultimate emptiness—answering ‘No’ for two causes and conditions. The treatise-author restates the question and answer in the sūtra, drawing out its main thread: Subhūti, with the wisdom of ultimate emptiness, challenges Maitreya—in rejoicing in and dedicating the merit of the buddhas that one thinks of, what is thought of is a past matter; 「是事如所念不」 tr. "is this matter as it is thought of?" Maitreya answers ‘No’ for two causes and conditions: first, the buddhas of the past have long since passed into extinction with nothing left remaining, and the bodhisattva either lacks the knowledge of past lives, or has it but cannot reach them, 「但以如所聞憶想分別，故不如所念」 tr. "only by recollection, imagining, and discrimination according to what he has heard, and so it is not as it is thought of"; second, the buddhas and their merits 「出三界、出三世，斷戲論語言道，如涅槃相，畢竟空清淨」 tr. "go beyond the three realms, go beyond the three times, have cut off the path of idle discourse and speech, are like the mark of nirvāṇa, ultimately empty and pure". One concerns the capacity of the thinking mind falling short, the other concerns the object thought of being fundamentally apart from marks—examined together from both sides, a thought that grasps at marks can surely not be true to what is.

18. The object of rejoicing explained broadly—four sections of merit. The treatise-author explains the sūtra sentence by sentence: thinking of the buddhas who have passed into extinction—the Buddha is the 「福德主」 tr. "lord of merit", so one thinks of the Buddha, and because one hears the names of past buddhas in the sūtras and books, one thinks broadly of all of them; 「從初發心」 tr. "from the first arousing of the mind"—at first one vows to deliver all beings; this mind corresponds to the three roots of goodness, non-greed, non-hatred, and non-delusion, and the karma of body, speech, and mind arising from the roots of goodness, coming together, is called merit; from the first arousing of the mind, practising the six perfections, entering the bodhisattva position, attaining the ten grounds, sitting at the seat of awakening, and on to the relics and the Dharma left behind after his passing—all is the coming together of the Buddha’s merits. Next it makes clear the merit corresponding to the six perfections (the other practices are all included in the six perfections), the roots of goodness of śrāvakas in training and beyond training (those in training and beyond training are purely noble ones; the major and minor marks are indeterminate form-dharmas and not wholesome merits, and so only the five aggregates of one beyond training are spoken of), those who attain the path within the Dharma left behind, and the roots of goodness of other beings—「是上四段福德」 tr. "these four sections of merit above": the practitioner’s mind takes them all as its object, recollects them, rejoices in them, and dedicates them, and this is called unsurpassed rejoicing.

19. Question and answer two—why not make merit oneself, instead of practising rejoicing in the mind? The questioner objects: why does one who seeks the Buddha path not make merit himself, but only practise rejoicing in the mind? The answer: 「諸菩薩以方便力，他勤勞作功德，能於中起隨喜者，福德勝自作者。」 tr. "The bodhisattvas, by the power of skilful means—when others toil diligently to make merit and they are able to give rise to rejoicing in it, their merit surpasses that of those who make it themselves." These words are very steep and must be well understood: it is not saying that those too lazy to cultivate themselves can discharge their duty by rejoicing, but that rejoicing is what the power of skilful means accomplishes—able, before the diligent toil of others, to give rise to no jealousy and no contempt, seeing truly how it excels and being glad; the breadth and the purity of this mind surpass making merit oneself confined to one’s own person.

20. Rejoicing is real merit—the samādhi of recollecting the Buddha, and the definition of object and matter. The treatise-author goes a layer further: the merit of rejoicing 「即是實福德」 tr. "is precisely real merit". Why? Thinking of the past buddhas is precisely the samādhi of recollecting the Buddha, and is also, among the six recollections, the recollection of the Buddha, of the Dharma, of the Saṅgha, of morality, of relinquishing, and of the gods; because pure morality, entering dhyāna, and giving rise to ultimate wisdom come together, one is able to give rise to right rejoicing—「是故不但隨喜而已，亦行是實法」 tr. "therefore it is not only rejoicing, but also practising this real dharma". It also defines the names: the dedication of the mind is precisely the mind of rejoicing; the 「緣」 tr. "object" is what the mind of rejoicing takes as its object, namely the merits done by the buddhas and by beings; the 「事」 tr. "matter" is the basis of the object, the place where the merits abide, namely the buddhas and beings, together with lands, mountains and forests, and monasteries as dwelling places. At this point, among the five ‘what’s of the earlier text, the two questions of object and matter have been given a clear definition in terms of worldly truth.

21. Question and answer three—the order in which inversions arise and are cut off, and the simile of the drop of water. The sūtra says that dedicating by grasping at marks falls into the three inversions of perception, of mind, and of view; the treatise-author first makes clear that this is a simile—「無佛而憶想念佛，猶如無常而念常、不淨而念淨」 tr. "where there is no Buddha, to recollect and imagine and think of the Buddha is like thinking of the impermanent as permanent and of the impure as pure". The questioner objects: view is the root of all the inversions, and a person of the first fruit has already cut off the inversion of view; why speak of all three kinds together? The answer: the inversions are 「生時異、斷時異」 tr. "different at the time of arising and different at the time of cutting off"—in arising, perception comes first, then mind, then view; in cutting off, view is cut off first, because it is what is cut off by seeing the truths, and the substance of the inversions is all the mark of view. Those still in training who are not yet free from desire, losing right mindfulness, grasp at the mark of purity and give rise to fetters; regaining right mindfulness, these cease at once, 「如渧水墮大熱鐵上，即時消滅」 tr. "like a drop of water falling on greatly heated iron, vanishing at once"; it is a small error and so is provisionally named inversion, not real inversion—therefore ordinary people have three kinds of inversion, and those in training two kinds.

22. The close of Treatise Section One—within ultimate emptiness, what is the object, what is the matter? The treatise-author gathers up this round of question and answer: the objects and the matters are 「如實畢竟空」 tr. "truly ultimately empty"; the thought too is empty, awakening too is empty, the mind of rejoicing too is empty, dānapāramitā and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas too are empty; if all dharmas are of one mark, namely the signless, ‘what here is the object? what is the matter? what is the mind dedicating to the unsurpassed path?’ Note: this is not the ending of a sceptic, but setting Subhūti’s five ‘what’s, just as they are, on the ground of ultimate emptiness, to drive out what follows—right dedication must be established on the premise of not destroying ultimate emptiness.

23. Sūtra Section Two—those long practised, with the five causes and conditions, dedicate without grasping at marks and by way of non-dual dharmas. Maitreya answers head-on: if the bodhisattva has 「久行六波羅蜜、多供養諸佛、種善根、與善知識相隨、善學自相空法」 tr. "long practised the six perfections, made many offerings to the buddhas, planted roots of goodness, kept company with the good friend, and trained well in the dharma of the emptiness of specific marks"—the five causes and conditions complete—then, toward these objects, these matters, the buddhas, the roots of goodness, and the merit of rejoicing, he dedicates 「不取相」 tr. "without grasping at marks", and moreover dedicates 「以不二法非不二法、非相非不相、非可得法非不可得法、非淨非垢、不生不滅法」 tr. "by way of dharmas that are non-dual and not non-dual, neither marked nor not marked, neither findable dharmas nor unfindable dharmas, neither pure nor defiled, neither arising nor ceasing", and this is called dedication. Conversely, for one in whom the five causes and conditions are not complete, all his minds grasp at marks and dedicate, and 「是不名迴向」 tr. "this is not called dedication". The key to the answer lies in the provisions: dedication without grasping at marks is not something a verbal understanding can practise; it is a power perfumed into being by long practice.

24. This meaning should not be spoken to those new to the training. Maitreya at once sets a boundary: such a meaning of prajñā, and so on up to the meaning of omniscience of all kinds—inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas—「不應為新學菩薩說」 tr. "should not be spoken to bodhisattvas new to the training", because those new to the training 「所有少許信樂恭敬清淨心皆亡失」 tr. "would lose whatever little faith, delight, reverence, and pure mind they have"; it should be spoken before avaivartika bodhisattvas, or to those protected by the good friend who have long made offerings to the buddhas and planted roots of goodness—such people, hearing it, are 「不沒、不驚、不畏、不怖」 tr. "not sunk, not startled, not afraid, not terrified". The Dharma has no partiality, yet hearers are fit or unfit: talk of ultimate emptiness is sweet dew to those who are fit, while to those not yet fit it instead ruins their first mind—that in teaching the Dharma there is a choice of season and capacity is exactly compassion.

25. The mind exhausted, ceased, changed, and departed—the difficulty that two minds are not together. Maitreya further applies the test of impermanence to the mind that dedicates: when the bodhisattva uses the mind to rejoice and dedicate, 「是心盡、滅、變、離」 tr. "this mind is exhausted, ceased, changed, and departed", and the objects, the matters, and the roots of goodness are likewise exhausted, ceased, changed, and departed—what here is the mind of rejoicing, what are the objects, the matters, the roots of goodness? Moreover 「二心不俱」 tr. "two minds are not together"—the mind of rejoicing and the mind of dedication (and so on to the mind of awakening) cannot stand side by side at the same time, and the nature of mind too is unfindable—how does the bodhisattva dedicate with the mind of rejoicing? The answer is in the last sentence: when practising prajñā, one knows in this way that 「般若波羅蜜無有法」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is without any dharma", and so on to dānapāramitā, form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and on to awakening—all without any dharma; 「應如是隨喜功德，迴向阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "in this way one should rejoice in merit and dedicate it to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"—rejoicing and dedicating within the absence of any dharma: only this is called the dedication of the merit of rejoicing.

26. Treatise Section Two—dharmas are very deep and the mind of rejoicing is subtle; the simile of iron entering the furnace. The treatise-author explains Maitreya’s intent: 「不壞諸法相，而隨喜心迴向無上道，是事甚難」 tr. "not destroying the marks of dharmas, and yet dedicating the mind of rejoicing to the unsurpassed path—this matter is very difficult"; the minds of ordinary people are hard and unyielding and cannot practise it. Those who have long practised the six perfections have deep and thick merits and so are unmoved, able to have faith and able to practise; because they have made many offerings to the buddhas and planted roots of goodness, their fetters are broken down and their minds are soft—these are causes and conditions from former lives; in this life they gain good teachers and good fellow students, and themselves learn that the real mark of all dharmas is empty, and with skilful means do not cling to this emptiness. So 「譬如鐵雖堅䩕，入鑪則柔軟，隨作何器」 tr. "it is like iron: though hard and stiff, when it enters the furnace it becomes soft, and whatever vessel one wishes can be made of it"; the bodhisattva’s mind, perfumed and refined by long practice and protected by the good friend, is tamed and pliant, and only so is it able, amid the buddhas, the objects, the matters, and the roots of goodness, to give rise to rejoicing without grasping at marks and to dedicate by means of the signless. The difference between hard and pliant is exactly the root, in the ground of the mind, of the difference between grasping at marks and being apart from marks.

27. Guarding those new to the training against clinging to emptiness—the simile of the fledglings’ wings. Why is it not spoken to those new to the training? The treatise-author lays bare the root of the sickness: those of scant merit and roots of goodness, hearing of ultimate emptiness, 「即著空」 tr. "at once cling to emptiness", and think, ‘if all dharmas are ultimately empty and without anything existent, why should I make merit?’—「則忘失善業」 tr. "and then they lose wholesome karma". So a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind is 「先教取相隨喜，漸得方便力，爾乃能行無相隨喜」 tr. "first taught rejoicing that grasps at marks; gradually he gains the power of skilful means, and only then is he able to practise signless rejoicing"—「譬如鳥子，羽翼未成，不可逼令高翔；六翮成就，則能遠飛」 tr. "it is like fledglings: while their wings are not yet grown, they cannot be forced to soar high; once their six quills are formed, they can fly far". This is an extremely important order of teaching in the whole chapter: rejoicing that grasps at marks is not a wrong road but the first step; signless rejoicing is not a separate start but the ripening of rejoicing that grasps at marks. Destroy a person’s first step and force him to soar high, and his fall can be foreseen.

28. Two kinds of people hear the Dharma with gladness—terror comes out of the mind of self. Those fit to hear are of two kinds: avaivartikas who have entered the position of dharmas and attained the acceptance of dharmas; and those who, though not avaivartikas, have long practised the six perfections, keep company with the good friend, and are helped by the power of inner merit and outer causes and conditions. These two kinds of people, hearing this Dharma, have 「心清淨，歡喜信受」 tr. "a pure mind, and gladly have faith in it and receive it"—like one long hungry and thirsty who obtains good food and drink, one in great heat who finds coolness, one in great cold who finds warmth. They think to themselves: through this wisdom I am able to deliver immeasurable beings—how much less could there be fright, fear, and terror! 「恐怖從我心中出」 tr. "Terror comes out of the mind of self"—in the Dharma even the marks of all dharmas are empty; how much less is there a self that fixedly grasps at the marks of dharmas and is startled on hearing of the signless. The source of terror does not lie in the depth of the Dharma, but in clinging to self not yet dissolved; this sentence can serve as a mirror that shows what lies within, whenever the mind is stirred on hearing the Dharma of emptiness.

29. The mind exhausted and ceased thought after thought, entering together into the nature of dharmas—right dedication first established. The treatise-author explains ‘the mind exhausted, ceased, changed, and departed’: the mind of dedication is 「念念盡、滅、變、離，無有住時」 tr. "thought after thought exhausted, ceased, changed, and departed, with no time of abiding"; the roots of goodness of the buddhas taken as object ceased long ago, and the mind of rejoicing now also ceases—「既滅無異」 tr. "since they have ceased, there is no difference": they enter together into the past, enter together into the real mark of all dharmas, and so there is no discriminating ‘this is the mind, this the object, this the matter, this the root of goodness’. 「若能如是迴向，是為正迴向。」 tr. "If one is able to dedicate in this way, this is right dedication." The first formal definition of right dedication is established here: it is not seeking some other mind that does not cease with which to dedicate, but truly knowing that subject and object are alike exhausted and alike enter the real mark, and dedicating within non-discrimination.

30. The two minds do not come together—cutting off love of dharma and relinquishing the attached mind. The treatise-author further explains ‘two minds are not together’: within one moment two minds do not occur side by side; at the time of the mind of rejoicing there is no mind of awakening; moreover 「一切心相畢竟空，不可以取相迴向」 tr. "the marks of all minds are ultimately empty; one cannot dedicate by grasping at marks". The bodhisattva knows that prajñā is empty and without fixed dharma; as with prajñā, so with all dharmas, up to the unsurpassed path; at that time he 「斷法愛、捨著心，於空無諍」 tr. "cuts off love of dharma, relinquishes the attached mind, and is without contention in emptiness", and this is called the bodhisattva’s right dedication. This passage completes Passage 29: right dedication is not only without the discrimination of others and self, but even love of dharma is cut off—only when one neither contends with nor clings even to emptiness is it thoroughgoing.

31. Sūtra Section Three—Śakra asks on behalf of those who have newly aroused the mind. Śakra Devānām Indra rises from his seat and asks: 「新發意菩薩聞是事，將無驚懼、怖畏？」 tr. "Will not bodhisattvas who have newly aroused the mind, hearing this matter, be startled and afraid, terrified and fearful?" How does a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind dedicate his roots of goodness? How does he dedicate the merit of rejoicing? Earlier Maitreya said plainly that this meaning is not to be spoken to those new to the training; Śakra deliberately asks on behalf of those new to the training—this question makes the gate of teaching of the whole chapter complete: those of superior faculties have the practice of superior faculties, and the beginning mind too must have a road for the beginning mind; without this question, signless right dedication would become a dharma for the few. Śakra asked repeatedly about merit in the preceding several chapters; here he again pleads on behalf of the beginning mind, which is exactly his constant office of protecting beginners.

32. Subhūti’s answer—the practice for one who has newly aroused the mind. Subhūti answers with a whole set of rules for beginners: practising prajñā yet 「不受是般若波羅蜜，以無所得故、無相故」 tr. "not receiving this prajñāpāramitā, with nothing to be attained, because of signlessness", and so on to dānapāramitā, likewise; 「多信解」 tr. "having much faith and understanding" in inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, and in the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas; always keeping company with the good friend, who explains for him the meaning of the six perfections, opening, showing, and distinguishing, so that he is never apart from prajñā, and so on to all dharmas; he is also taught about the deeds of Māra, and having heard of the deeds of Māra he 「不增不減」 tr. "neither increases nor decreases", because he does not receive any dharma; he is never apart from the buddhas, plants roots of goodness among them, is born into the family of the bodhisattvas, and on until attaining awakening is never apart from roots of goodness. The beginner cannot practise the signless all at once, but can be gradually perfumed through five things—not receiving, faith and understanding, relying on a teacher, recognising Māra, drawing near to the buddhas—this is the staircase laid down for those whose wings are not yet grown.

33. The object of rejoicing for one who has newly aroused the mind—the praises such as ‘cut off the path of birth and death’. What the bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind takes as the object of rejoicing: the buddhas of the ten directions in the past—who have 「斷生死道、斷諸戲論、道盡、棄重擔、滅聚落刺、斷諸有結、正智、得解脫」 tr. "cut off the path of birth and death, cut off all idle discourse, exhausted the path, cast off the heavy burden, destroyed the thorns of the village, cut off the fetters of existence, have right knowledge, and attained liberation"—and the merits done by their disciples, together with the roots of goodness planted by the great kṣatriya clans, the great brahmin clans, the great householder families, and the gods from the heavens of the Four Heavenly Kings up to the Pure Abodes; 「一切和合稱量，以隨喜心」 tr. "all brought together and weighed, with the mind of rejoicing", supreme and without equal, he dedicates. This is of one pattern with the object in Subhūti’s broad question earlier, only the practice is set up for the beginning mind: bringing together and weighing and then rejoicing is exactly the carrying out of ‘first teaching rejoicing that grasps at marks’.

34. How not to fall into the three inversions—not giving rise to the perception of Buddha, of Saṅgha, of mind. Maitreya asks: when one who has newly aroused the mind thinks of the roots of goodness of the buddhas and their disciples, rejoices, and dedicates, how does he not fall into the three inversions of perception, of mind, and of view? Subhūti answers with one sentence of mind-dharma: thinking of the buddhas and the Saṅgha, 「不生佛想、不生僧想，無善根想」 tr. "he does not give rise to the perception of Buddha, does not give rise to the perception of Saṅgha, and has no perception of roots of goodness", and dedicates with this mind; 「是心中亦不生心想」 tr. "within this mind he also does not give rise to the perception of mind"—dedicating in this way, the three things are not inverted. Conversely, grasping at marks and then dedicating is called the three inversions. Not giving rise to the perception of Buddha is not not thinking of the Buddha; it is thinking without setting up a marked Buddha as the thing grasped; even for the thinking mind no perception of mind is set up—with no mark established at either end, subject or object, inversion has nowhere to arise.

35. Knowing, in the moment of thinking, that it is exhausted and ceased—right dedication, not wrong dedication. Subhūti continues: using this mind to think of the roots of goodness of the buddhas and the Saṅgha, 「是心念時，即知盡滅」 tr. "at the time this mind thinks, he at once knows it is exhausted and ceased"; since it is exhausted and ceased, this dharma cannot be dedicated; the mind of dedication that is used is also of the mark of exhaustion and cessation, and the dharma of the place dedicated to is also of such a mark—「若如是迴向，是名正迴向，非邪迴向」 tr. "if one dedicates in this way, this is called right dedication, not wrong dedication". This has the same skeleton as Passage 29 of Treatise Section Two, but is spoken for the beginning mind: the beginner too can, at the place where a thought arises, at once contemplate its ceasing, without waiting for long practice; dedicating within the mark of exhaustion and cessation is right and not wrong.

36. True dedication and unsurpassed dedication. Sūtra Section Three goes two layers further: first, knowing that these dharmas are exhausted and ceased, and that the dharma of the place dedicated to is also 「自性空」 tr. "empty of self-nature", to be able to dedicate in this way—「是名真迴向」 tr. "this is called true dedication"; second, knowing that 「無有法能迴向法」 tr. "there is no dharma that can dedicate a dharma"—because all dharmas are empty of self-nature—if one dedicates in this way it is called right dedication; practising prajñā and so on up to dānapāramitā, one does not fall into the three inversions, because one 「不著是迴向，亦不見以諸善根迴向菩提心處」 tr. "does not cling to this dedication, and also does not see the place where the roots of goodness are dedicated to the mind of awakening", and this is called 「無上迴向」 tr. "unsurpassed dedication". From right dedication to true dedication to unsurpassed dedication is a threefold deepening of one and the same meaning of being apart from marks: first not grasping at marks, next knowing the emptiness of self-nature, last seeing neither the clinging to dedication nor the place of dedication.

37. Treatise Section Three—why Śakra asks again. The treatise-author asks himself: the meaning of the fright and terror of those who have newly aroused the mind has already been asked and answered; why is it asked again now? The answer: though Maitreya said it should not be spoken to those new to the training but may be spoken to avaivartikas and to those long practised, 「已說正迴向因緣，而猶說空法」 tr. "having already spoken of the causes and conditions of right dedication, he still spoke the dharma of emptiness", and so Śakra doubted: there are in the assembly those who have newly aroused the mind—「云何更說使不恐怖」 tr. "how can it be further explained so that they are not terrified?" Subhūti, wishing to complete what Maitreya said and wishing those who have newly aroused the mind to dedicate rightly, answers Śakra: though those who have newly aroused the mind have not long practised the six perfections nor made many offerings to the buddhas, 「以利根、得善知識是二因緣故，堪任正迴向」 tr. "because of these two causes and conditions, sharp faculties and gaining the good friend, they are fit for right dedication". Those long practised rely on their provisions from past lives; those who have newly aroused the mind rely on sharp faculties and on teachers and friends—the roads differ, yet both have a gate.

38. The practice of one who has newly aroused the mind explained—Māra cannot break emptiness. The treatise-author explains Subhūti’s answer sentence by sentence: not receiving prajñā—with nothing to be attained and because of ultimate emptiness, 「亦不得、亦不著」 tr. "one neither finds it nor clings to it"; having much faith and understanding in inner emptiness—because one always cultivates and delights in entering the samādhi of the contemplation of inner emptiness; the good friend is able to explain in accord with the meaning of the six perfections, so that one is never apart from prajñā, and on to entering the bodhisattva’s position of dharmas—「有久行入菩薩位，有新發意入菩薩位」 tr. "there are those long practised who enter the bodhisattva position, and there are those who have newly aroused the mind who enter the bodhisattva position". Hearing of the deeds of Māra and neither increasing nor decreasing—because one has cultivated well the real mark of all dharmas: 「若魔欲破，為欲破空，空則無破；若有增益，如幻如夢，何所增益」 tr. "if Māra wishes to break it, he is wishing to break emptiness, and emptiness has nothing to break; if there is increase, it is like an illusion, like a dream—what is there to increase?" Obtaining these causes and conditions, one is never apart from the buddhas, is born into the family of the bodhisattvas, is not apart from roots of goodness life after life, 「與久發意無異」 tr. "no different from those who aroused the mind long ago"—the road of the beginning mind, walked to its end, returns to the same place as long practice.

39. The eight phrases of ‘cut off the path’ explained phrase by phrase—the simile of wooden clogs crushing thorns, and the four kinds of fields of merit. The treatise-author explains the words praising the buddhas: they cut off the path of birth and death and enter nirvāṇa without remainder; because idle discourse is cut off, all idle discourse is destroyed; because through the samādhi of the emptiness of emptiness and the like they relinquish the eight limbs of the noble path, 「道盡」 tr. "the path is exhausted"; because the five aggregates give rise to suffering and vexation, they are the 「重擔」 tr. "heavy burden", and the five aggregates are relinquished in two ways—nirvāṇa with remainder relinquishes the afflictions that are the causes and conditions of the five aggregates, nirvāṇa without remainder relinquishes the five aggregates as result; the houses of the white-robed laity are called the village, renunciants live relying on them, and the houses of the laity have the thorns of the five desires, as when one enters a grove of thorny fruit trees to take fruit and is pricked by the thorns; 「如人著木屐踐刺，刺則摧折」 tr. "as when a person wearing wooden clogs treads on thorns, the thorns are crushed and broken"—the buddhas, with the clogs of dhyāna and wisdom, crush the thorns of the five desires, destroying and cutting off the five lower fetters; when the fetters of the portion of existence are exhausted, the five higher fetters are cut off; the wisdom corresponding to the vajra samādhi of the real mark of all dharmas cuts off all afflictions together with their residual habits, and so it says 「正智、得解脫」 tr. "right knowledge, attained liberation". Further, the Buddha’s disciples are of three kinds (bodhisattvas, pratyekabuddhas, and śrāvakas); the great kṣatriya clans and so on up to the gods of the Pure Abodes are the 「四種福田因」 tr. "causes of the four kinds of fields of merit", places where merit is planted. The words of praise are not empty phrases; phrase after phrase is the order of path and fruit.

40. Why one does not give rise to the perception of Buddha—arising from coming together, without self-nature. The treatise-author explains the ground for ‘not giving rise to the perception of Buddha’: 「一切法從和合生，無有自性，故無有定法名為佛」 tr. "all dharmas arise from coming together and have no self-nature, and so there is no fixed dharma named Buddha"; therefore one does not give rise to the perception of Buddha and the like; the mind of dedication too does not give rise to the perception of mind, and so does not fall into inversion; what runs contrary to this falls into inversion. The ground beneath not giving rise to the perception of Buddha is dependent arising: the Buddha too is a provisional name for the coming together of the five aggregates; to set up a perception of something fixed and real upon a provisional name for a coming together is exactly the root of inversion—this sentence sets the mind-dharma (Passage 34) on the ground of doctrine, so that the teaching of not giving rise to perception does not become a forced suppression of thought, but is the natural result of knowing as things truly are.

41. The exhausted mind enters the gate of impermanence and reaches the nature of dharmas. The treatise-author explains ‘at the time of thinking one at once knows it is exhausted and ceased’: when the mind is exhausted, one at once knows it is exhausted; the exhausted mind cannot be dedicated, 「變失滅壞故」 tr. "because it has changed, been lost, ceased, and broken down"; this mind 「入無常門，到法性中」 tr. "enters the gate of impermanence and reaches the nature of dharmas"—in the nature of dharmas there is no discriminating ‘this is mind, this is not mind; this is the Buddha, this a disciple; this is a root of goodness, this the unsurpassed path’; the mark of exhaustion of the mind of dedication and of the place dedicated to is likewise. It also defines first and later: 「初心是憶念過去諸佛等隨喜功德，後心是迴向心。」 tr. "The first mind is recollecting the past buddhas and so on and rejoicing in their merits; the later mind is the mind of dedication." If one dedicates in this way, it is called right dedication. Entering the nature of dharmas through the gate of impermanence is a real road of contemplative practice in this chapter: from the direct perception of thought-by-thought arising and ceasing, going straight into the non-discriminating nature of dharmas.

42. The difficulty of the first mind and the later mind—the real mark of all dharmas is exhaustion. The questioner objects: the first mind and the later mind have the mark of arising and ceasing and can be called impermanent; but the dharma of the place dedicated to is the unsurpassed path, which lies in the future—「云何言盡滅」 tr. "how can one say it is exhausted and ceased?" The answer: it has already been answered, 「入無常門，到法性中」 tr. "entering the gate of impermanence and reaching the nature of dharmas"—here it does not say 「盡是無常」 tr. "exhaustion is impermanence", but only says 「諸法實相是盡」 tr. "the real mark of all dharmas is exhaustion"; earlier it also said that awakening 「出三世、過三界，無受相」 tr. "goes beyond the three times, passes beyond the three realms, and has no mark of receiving". One must keep an eye on this answer: to say ‘exhaustion’ is not to say that the unsurpassed path will decay and cease, but that the real mark of all dharmas is of itself quiescent, with no mark to be received—turning ‘exhaustion’ over from the sense of annihilation in time to the sense of original quiescence in the real mark; only then does the ‘knowing of cessation’ in right dedication not fall into the view of annihilation.

43. Knowing cessation and knowing emptiness is true dedication—because nothing is done. The treatise-author gathers it up: the bodhisattva dedicates the roots of goodness of the past buddhas and so on to the unsurpassed path, 「知是事皆盡滅」 tr. "knowing that these matters are all exhausted and ceased", 「知迴向處法亦自性空，能知滅、知空」 tr. "knowing that the dharma of the place dedicated to is also empty of self-nature, able to know cessation and to know emptiness"—this is 「真迴向」 tr. "true dedication"; because past dharmas are impermanent, they cannot be dedicated into a dharma empty of self-nature; because past dharmas are empty, they also cannot be dedicated into a dharma empty of self-nature—「用如是智慧迴向」 tr. "dedicating with such wisdom" is called 「正迴向」 tr. "right dedication". Again: because all dharmas arise from causes and conditions, they have no power of their own to abide constantly; their own mark of dharma does not move—how much less can they do anything? Because nothing is done, 「一切法中無有法能迴向法」 tr. "among all dharmas there is no dharma that can dedicate a dharma", and this is called 「正迴向」 tr. "right dedication"; in this way, though the bodhisattva practises prajñā and all the other wholesome dharmas, he does not fall into inversion, 「一切法不著故」 tr. "because he does not cling to any dharma". The whole unit of the First Part is here brought to completion: right dedication is dedicating while knowing cessation, knowing emptiness, doing nothing, and clinging to nothing.

Do Not Misread

Do not read ‘only by rejoicing in the mind it surpasses making merit oneself’ as permission to give up cultivation and rejoice emptily. The treatise-author says plainly that rejoicing is precisely real merit—thinking of the past buddhas is precisely the samādhi of recollecting the Buddha, and because pure morality, entering dhyāna, and giving rise to ultimate wisdom come together, one is able to give rise to right rejoicing; moreover one who has newly aroused the mind must not receive, must have faith and understanding, rely on the good friend, recognise the deeds of Māra, draw near to the buddhas and plant roots of goodness—layer upon layer, all real practice. The surpassing of rejoicing lies in the breadth of the mind and the accomplishment of the power of skilful means, not in saving effort; read it as a door to laziness, and one falls right into the ‘losing wholesome karma’ that the treatise-author guards against.

Do not read ‘grasping at marks, it cannot be found as it is thought of’ as saying that rejoicing and dedication cannot be practised. What Maitreya rules is that dedication that grasps at marks cannot be found as it is thought of, not that dedication itself is without effect; what follows sets up head-on the right dedication, true dedication, and unsurpassed dedication that do not grasp at marks, and for those who have newly aroused the mind opens separately a staircase of first teaching rejoicing that grasps at marks. Read it as denying dedication, and the true intent of the chapter is read backwards.

Do not read ‘should not be spoken to bodhisattvas new to the training’ as keeping a secret dharma to oneself. It is not spoken to those new to the training because, hearing of ultimate emptiness, they at once cling to emptiness and lose wholesome karma, like fledglings whose wings are not yet grown, who cannot be forced to soar high—it is protective care, not stinginess with the Dharma. In the same sūtra, Śakra at once asks on behalf of those who have newly aroused the mind, and Subhūti lays out a whole set of practices for them, which shows that the Dharma-gate does not choose among people; it chooses only the season and the order of teaching.

Do not read ‘not giving rise to the perception of Buddha, not giving rise to the perception of Saṅgha’ as not revering the Buddha and the Saṅgha. Not giving rise to the perception of Buddha is, while recollecting the Buddha, not setting up a fixed, real, marked Buddha as the thing grasped—because all dharmas arise from coming together and have no self-nature, there is no fixed dharma named Buddha; precisely by recollecting the Buddha in this way one does not fall into the three inversions of perception, of mind, and of view. Read it as permission not to recollect the Buddha and not to revere the Saṅgha, and it runs entirely contrary to the sūtra’s ‘never apart from the buddhas’ and ‘thinking of the buddhas and the Saṅgha’.

Do not read ‘exhausted, ceased, changed, and departed’ and ‘the real mark of all dharmas is exhaustion’ as annihilation. The treatise-author specially settles this: here it does not say 「盡是無常」 tr. "exhaustion is impermanence", but says 「諸法實相是盡」 tr. "the real mark of all dharmas is exhaustion"; awakening goes beyond the three times, passes beyond the three realms, and has no mark of receiving. Speaking of exhaustion and cessation is entering the gate of impermanence from the direct perception of thought-by-thought non-abiding and reaching the nature of dharmas; it is the quiescence of original quiescence, not the cessation of dying out; the knowing of cessation and knowing of emptiness in right dedication is exactly being apart from the two extremes of annihilation and permanence, not throwing oneself toward the extreme of annihilation.

Do not read the judgement that ordinary people have three inversions and those in training two as a contradiction between sūtra and treatise. The sūtra speaks generally of the three inversions of perception, of mind, and of view; the treatise explains that for a person of the first fruit the inversion of view has already been cut off by the path of seeing the truths, and only the two kinds, perception and mind, remain; moreover the inversions of perception and mind in those in training are like a drop of water falling on greatly heated iron and vanishing at once, a small error provisionally named inversion—this is a difference in the order of the times of arising and of cutting off, not a dispute over numbers.

Bearing on Practice

Rejoicing is the most ordinary of practices and also the least dispensable. On seeing someone cultivate merit and practise the path, is one’s first thought gladness or calculation?—this is exactly the mirror this chapter gives for daily life. The treatise-author says that apart from merit, humans and animals practise the same three things, lust, eating and drinking, and fighting—to be glad from the heart on seeing people able to cultivate merit and practise the path beyond these three things: this one thought does not toil body or speech, yet in one’s own mind it plants a seed that corresponds with the causes of all the worthy and noble. One can first train close at hand: seeing a fellow practitioner’s vigour, seeing someone give and keep morality, rejoice along with it, thinking that those who cultivate merit and practise the path are the most excellent.

After rejoicing one must dedicate, and when dedicating use the two phrases ‘sharing it with all beings, with nothing to be attained’ as a seal. Sharing it is not keeping merit privately as an account book of my own merits; nothing to be attained is not clinging to merit as a thing that can be taken and accumulated. The treatise-author has already made clear that the substance of merit cannot be given to others while its result can—when dedicating, to vow to benefit beings with the result is the sharing that speaks of the cause in the result; to set up in the mind no mark of one who dedicates or of what is dedicated is nothing to be attained.

Contemplating the exhaustion and cessation of the mind is the direct method of contemplation this unit gives. When the mind of rejoicing arises, contemplate that this mind is thought after thought exhausted, ceased, changed, and departed, with no time of abiding; the roots of goodness of the buddhas thought of ceased long ago, the mind that thinks ceases now; since they have ceased there is no difference, and together they enter the nature of dharmas. This contemplation at first seems to snatch away what one relies on, but in fact it cuts off exactly the root of grasping at marks; if terror arises, remember the treatise-author’s words—terror comes out of the mind of self, not out of the Dharma.

Measure one’s own capacity and choose the step on which to walk. Those whose provisions from long practice are not yet sufficient need not be ashamed of rejoicing that grasps at marks—first teaching rejoicing that grasps at marks is a step the Buddha’s sūtra itself sets up, like fledglings first nourishing their wings; but one must know that this is a step and not the summit, and that, gradually gaining the power of skilful means, one is then able to practise signless rejoicing. Those already able to hear of emptiness without being startled should advance to contemplating without giving rise to the perception of Buddha or the perception of mind, and at the place where a thought arises at once knowing it is exhausted and ceased. Both steps are the right road; what is wrong is only taking the step for the summit, or skipping steps to climb.

Relying on the good friend and recognising the deeds of Māra are the two guard-rails for one who has newly aroused the mind. The sūtra text sets always keeping company with the good friend at the head of the practices for one who has newly aroused the mind, and specially teaches about the deeds of Māra—hearing of all kinds of deeds of Māra without increase or decrease, because one does not receive any dharma. On the road of practice, meeting favourable and adverse circumstances alike, answer them with the two words ‘not receiving’: when Māra wishes to break emptiness, emptiness has nothing to be broken; when Māra wishes to add increase, it is like an illusion, like a dream.

Further Resonances

The skeleton of the First Part is one line, running from setting out the thesis, to testing the difficulty, to answering along two tracks. Maitreya sets out the thesis: the merit of rejoicing, shared with all beings and dedicated with nothing to be attained, is supreme and foremost—the cause of its surpassing lies in its being for the deliverance of all beings, and not for one’s own taming, purification, and deliverance. Subhūti tests the difficulty with ultimate emptiness: the roots of goodness of the buddhas thought of are without anything existent; dedication that grasps at marks cannot be found as it is thought of, and moreover falls into the three inversions; not grasping at marks, then what is the object, what the matter, what the dedication?—the five ‘what’s block off both sides entirely. The answer is laid out on two tracks: the upper track is those in whom the five causes and conditions, long practice of the six perfections and the rest, are complete—their minds, like iron entering the furnace, are tamed and pliant, able not to grasp at marks and to dedicate by way of dharmas that are non-dual, non-arising, and non-ceasing; the lower track is those who have newly aroused the mind, who, through the two causes and conditions of sharp faculties and the good friend, are first taught rejoicing that grasps at marks and gradually gain the power of skilful means, taking the five things—not receiving, faith and understanding, relying on a teacher, recognising Māra, drawing near to the buddhas—as their steps. The two tracks converge on one and the same mind-dharma: thinking of the buddhas and the Saṅgha without giving rise to the perception of Buddha, of Saṅgha, or of mind; at the time of thinking at once knowing it is exhausted and ceased; the mind entering the gate of impermanence and reaching the nature of dharmas; knowing cessation and knowing emptiness; because nothing is done, there being no dharma that can dedicate a dharma—this is called right dedication, true dedication, unsurpassed dedication. Two sentences of the treatise-author hold up the whole unit: one is that Maitreya, according with the Buddha’s original intent, has Subhūti speak broadly on prajñā by way of the dharma of rejoicing—the gate of merit is itself the gate of prajñā; the other is that terror comes out of the mind of self—the Dharma of emptiness is not to be feared; what is to be feared is the recoil of clinging to self when it meets emptiness. The First Part answers ‘how can one dedicate without grasping at marks’ up to the point where the definition of right dedication is established; for rejoicing and dedication there still remain the deeper discussion of being apart from marks and the fine discrimination of right and wrong, which the Last Part of this chapter goes on to unfold; they are not anticipated here.

Rejoicing and Dedication, Last Part: Rejoicing Apart from Marks and Dedication by the Mark of Passing into Extinction; Dedication Mixed with Poison, Right Dedication, and True Dedication; All Dharmas Not Bound to the Three Realms; Dedication with the Mind Unattached as Supreme; Rejoicing Equal to Liberation; the Three Kinds of Marks and the Five Contrasts

What Is Being Asked

The First Part set up the tenet of this chapter and its difficulty: Maitreya declared that when a bodhisattva dedicates the merit of rejoicing to the unsurpassed path, that merit is 「最上、第一、最妙、無上、無與等」 tr. "supreme, foremost, most wondrous, unsurpassed, and without equal"; Subhūti at once raised a difficulty from ultimate emptiness—the roots of goodness of the buddhas in which one rejoices are all matters of the past, already ceased; if one dedicates by grasping at marks, it cannot be found as it is thought of—will one not fall into the three inversions of perception, of mind, and of view? On one side, the merit of rejoicing and dedication is supreme; on the other, dedication that grasps at marks must fall into inversion: how these two ends can hold at the same time is precisely the compass of the whole chapter. The Last Part takes up this difficulty and unfolds the answer layer by layer. First it shows rejoicing apart from marks—merit is apart from the five aggregates, the self-nature of all dharmas is apart, and dedication by the mark of passing into extinction does not fall into the three inversions. Then, with the single simile of food mixed with poison, it judges the sickness of dedication that grasps at marks to be 「毒」 tr. "poison", establishes rejoicing as the buddhas know as right dedication, and sets up the simile of shooting at the ground to make clear that it cannot miss. Next the sūtra text goes a step further: all dharmas are not bound to the three realms and are not named by the three times; if a dharma is unarisen then there is no dharma, and within no dharma there can be no dedication—and from this it presses out that dedication without poison is dedication that is signless and without attainment. Then the Buddha himself comes forward: three levels of weighing reveal that dedication 「心不著」 tr. "with the mind unattached" is supreme; the gods come in four rounds to praise the greatest dedication that does not fall into dual dharmas; and at last the answer is given to 「云何名隨喜最上乃至無與等」 tr. "what is called the supreme rejoicing, and so on up to without equal"—neither grasping nor relinquishing, equal to liberation. At the end the treatise-author gathers up the whole chapter with the three kinds of marks, the linked chain of meanings, three rounds of question and answer, and the five contrasts. What the Last Part asks, when all is said, is only one thing: how can a mind of dedication that is without anything existent and unfindable dedicate to an awakening that is without anything existent—and yet its merit is, on the contrary, supreme?

Passage by Passage

1. Rejoicing apart from marks: merit is apart from the five aggregates, and the self-nature of all dharmas is apart. The two opening passages of the Last Part first place the merit of rejoicing itself under the contemplation of emptiness. The first passage says: the bodhisattva knows that the merit he gives rise to is apart from the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, and the eighteen elements, and knows too that prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, are all of the mark of being apart; with such a mind of rejoicing he gives rise to merit and dedicates it. The second passage goes further: he knows that 「隨喜福德自性離」 tr. "the merit of rejoicing is apart in its self-nature"; the buddhas are apart from the nature of a buddha, the roots of goodness are apart from the nature of roots of goodness, and the mind of awakening, dedication, the bodhisattva, and so on up to dānapāramitā—the nature of each one is also apart. Only by practising the prajñā of being apart in this way is it called giving rise to the merit of rejoicing within prajñā. The earlier passage says that within merit there are no aggregates, elements, or sense-fields; the later passage says that merit, together with everything that dedicates and everything dedicated to, is fundamentally apart in its self-nature. Rejoicing is not abandoned, yet the mark of rejoicing is first emptied—this is the foundation of every answer in the Last Part.

2. Dedication by the mark of passing into extinction does not fall into the three inversions. How are the roots of goodness of buddhas who have passed into extinction in the past to be dedicated? The sūtra teaches the bodhisattva to form this thought: 「如諸佛滅度相，諸善根相亦如是，滅度法相亦如是；我用心迴向，是心相亦如是。」 tr. "As is the mark of the buddhas' passing into extinction, so too is the mark of the roots of goodness, so too is the mark of the dharma of passing into extinction; the mind with which I dedicate—the mark of this mind is so too." The mark of the buddhas' passing into extinction is precisely quiescent cessation, the signless; the roots of goodness, the dharma of passing into extinction, and even this one thought of dedication of mine are not two with it in their mark. One who can dedicate in this way is dedicating to unsurpassed awakening, and does not fall into the three inversions of perception, of mind, and of view. Conversely, to grasp at the mark of the buddhas and the mark of the roots of goodness and then dedicate is not called dedication—because the buddhas of the past and their roots of goodness are 「非相緣、非無相緣」 tr. "neither an object for marks nor an object for the signless": they cannot be taken as object by grasping at marks, nor can they be taken as object by clinging to a signless. Grasping at marks, one falls into the three inversions. This passage takes the First Part's difficulty of inversion head-on: it is not that dedication is not allowed; it is that dedication that grasps at marks is not allowed.

3. Maitreya asks how one can dedicate without grasping at marks; within prajñā the three things are unfindable. Since one does not grasp at marks with regard to the roots of goodness and yet is able to dedicate, this matter is extremely hard; so Maitreya asks Subhūti: how can it be so? Subhūti answers: precisely because of this matter, one should know that within the prajñā one trains in 「應有般若波羅蜜方便力」 tr. "there should be the power of skilful means of prajñāpāramitā"; if merit is apart from prajñā, it cannot be dedicated. Why? Within prajñā, 「諸佛不可得」 tr. "the buddhas are unfindable", 「諸善根不可得」 tr. "the roots of goodness are unfindable", and the mind that dedicates to awakening is also unfindable—the mind that takes the object, the object taken, and the fruit toward which one turns: all three things are unfindable. That one can dedicate without grasping at marks does not rely on forcing oneself not to think, but on the power of skilful means by which prajñā sees that the three things are empty from the beginning. Here the three words 「方便力」 tr. "power of skilful means" are the eye of the passage: the wisdom of emptiness and the practice of dedication run together at the same time without obstructing each other, and this is precisely the skilful means of prajñā.

4. What the buddhas do not permit: because it grasps at marks and has something to be attained. The bodhisattva should reflect: the bodies of all the past buddhas and their disciples have ceased, and their roots of goodness have also ceased; if I now grasp at marks and discriminate upon them and then dedicate, the buddhas do not permit it—「取相、有所得故」 tr. "because it grasps at marks and has something to be attained". In explaining this passage the treatise-author speaks still more piercingly: to grasp at marks and discriminate, saying this is a buddha, this is a disciple, this is a root of goodness, is 「與諸法實相異故」 tr. "because it differs from the real mark of all dharmas"; when one has received its result for a long time it will surely be exhausted, and because it has something to be attained one cannot reach the Buddha path quickly; to recollect, imagine, and discriminate about the buddhas of the past is itself a great loss—「過去佛空無，而我憶想分別」 tr. "the buddhas of the past are empty and non-existent, and yet I recollect, imagine, and discriminate"! The buddhas do not permit it, not because they dislike the practitioner's arousing the mind and dedicating, but because they pity him for building empty recollections where there is empty non-existence, and for taking a result that has an end to be without end.

5. The simile of food mixed with poison: of good colour and good fragrance, with poison inside. The sickness of dedication that grasps at marks the sūtra gathers up entirely in one simile: 「譬如美食雜毒」 tr. "it is like fine food mixed with poison". The food has good colour and good fragrance and is craved by people; a fool eats it with delight, and when the food is about to be digested he suffers death or suffering equal to death. It is not that the merit of dedication that grasps at marks is absent—colour and fragrance are both fine, and the wealth and pleasures of humans and gods appear in every form; the sickness lies only in the one taste of poison mixed within, and when enjoyment is about to be exhausted, the painful result follows at once. Dedication with something to be attained 「有相、有動、有戲論」 tr. "has marks, has movement, has idle discourse", and so the dharma it attains never amounts to right dedication. The measure of this simile must be seen precisely: what is rejected is the poison, not the food; the grasping at marks, not the merit.

6. Teaching others without truly receiving: like food mixed with poison, it slanders the Buddha. The sūtra pushes a layer further: suppose someone does not himself truly receive, does not truly grasp the marks, does not truly recite and read, does not understand the meaning within, and yet teaches others to weigh together and join all the roots of goodness of the buddhas of the ten directions and the three times, from the first arousing of intent up to the end of the Dharma, and the roots of goodness planted by gods, nāgas, and spirits, and to rejoice and dedicate them by grasping at marks—because this dedication attains its dharma by grasping at marks, it too is like food mixed with poison; such a teacher 「則為謗佛」 tr. "thereby slanders the Buddha", does not follow the Buddha's teaching, does not speak according to the Dharma. The sickness passes from misleading oneself to misleading others: when one person grasps at marks, the poison is in one meal; when he teaches others by it, the poison spreads through his whole assembly. So this passage is spoken especially for teachers—if the Dharma one transmits is mixed with the poison of something to be attained, the wider the teaching, the deeper the loss.

7. What is right dedication: as the buddhas know, so too do I. Having refuted this far, the sūtra establishes the tenet head-on: one who seeks the Buddha path and does not wish to slander the Buddha should dedicate thus—「如諸佛所知無上智慧，是諸善根相、是諸善根性，我亦如是隨喜」 tr. "as the buddhas know with their unsurpassed wisdom the mark of these roots of goodness and the nature of these roots of goodness, so too do I rejoice"; as the buddhas know, so too do I dedicate. Whatever the mark and nature of the roots of goodness may be, I do not grasp them by my own view, but take as my standard entirely what the unsurpassed wisdom of the buddhas knows. Dedicating in this way, one does not slander the Buddha; it is as the Buddha taught, as the Buddha's Dharma speaks, and the dedication is without poison. The method of right dedication is utterly plain: it is not seeking some other mysterious state of mind, but only exchanging ‘as I grasp it’ for ‘as the buddhas know it’—setting down one's own mind's grasping at marks and taking the real mark of the Buddha's wisdom as the standard.

8. The treatise explains that merit is empty of specific marks: the general mark and the particular mark, the mind of awakening and the mind of dedication. In explaining the two opening passages, the treatise-author first points out their order: 「先但說過去事，今說自起隨喜福德」 tr. "earlier only matters of the past were spoken of; now the merit of rejoicing that one gives rise to oneself is spoken of"—what the First Part emptied was the past roots of goodness in which one rejoices; here it goes on to empty the merit, arisen from oneself, of the one who rejoices. He also defines the various terms: the merit of rejoicing is the mark of all merit spoken of in general; the merit arising from rejoicing in roots of goodness is spoken of by its particular mark; to take as one's own object the unsurpassed path one seeks is called the mind of awakening; that the fruit of the merit of the mind of rejoicing seeks only the unsurpassed path is called the mind of dedication; and the practitioner is provisionally named a bodhisattva within the five aggregates. The final sentence gathers it all: earlier it was said that within merit one is apart from the five aggregates; now it is said that 「福德自相空」 tr. "merit is empty of its specific marks". Advancing from the emptiness of objects to the emptiness of mind, and from being apart from the marks of others to being apart from one's own mark, the treatise-author sets out clearly the order of depth in the two passages of the sūtra text.

9. Thinking of the quiescent-cessation mark of the past buddhas; leaving the two extremes and walking the middle way. The treatise-author goes on to explain dedication by the mark of passing into extinction: the bodhisattva should think that, as the past buddhas entered nirvāṇa without remainder, 「無相、無戲論，性常寂滅」 tr. "signless, without idle discourse, their nature constantly quiescent and ceased", so too are this merit and the mind of dedication—dedicating in this way, one does not fall into inversion. He also explains why grasping at marks is not called dedication: 「有相是一邊，無相是一邊，離是二邊行中道，是諸佛實相。」 tr. "Having marks is one extreme; being without marks is one extreme; leaving these two extremes and walking the middle way is the real mark of the buddhas." The past buddhas do not fall within the reckoning of marks, nor do they fall within the reckoning of the signless; to grasp at the reckoning of marks is certainly a fall, and to cling to the signless is also a fall. This passage sets the balance-marks of the middle way for the whole chapter: dedication by the mark of passing into extinction is not contemplating a 「無」 tr. "nothingness", but leaving the two extremes of existence and non-existence and taking the real mark of quiescent cessation as its mark; the ruling in the three kinds of marks below, that the mark of the signless too should not be grasped, has its root right here.

10. Maitreya asks again, and the power of skilful means: the undeceiving path is prajñā itself. Not grasping at marks with regard to any dharma and yet being able to dedicate—this matter is very hard, so Maitreya asks again. The treatise-author says of Subhūti that 「是中不得決定答處」 tr. "here he found no place for a definitive answer"—this matter fundamentally has no definitive name or word that can be set on it—so he answers only: because of this matter, the bodhisattva trains in prajñā to seek the power of skilful means. He also explains why merit apart from prajñā cannot be dedicated: among all dharmas one dharma is real and does not deceive, namely anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; only by walking the undeceiving path in accordance with this awakening can it be attained, and 「不誑道者，即是般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the undeceiving path is precisely prajñāpāramitā". Prajñā is 「畢竟空，無有分別」 tr. "ultimate emptiness, without discrimination"; whether merit is apart from prajñā or not apart from it, neither can be attained and dedicated. The reason dedication can be not in vain is only that what one walks is the undeceiving path; and the undeceiving path is nothing other than the prajñā of ultimate emptiness.

11. The simile of food mixed with poison explained phrase by phrase. The treatise-author matches each phrase of the simile to the Dharma one by one: 「食」 tr. "the food" is the merit of rejoicing; 「毒」 tr. "the poison" is the afflictions of craving, views, and the like, born of grasping at marks; 「好色」 tr. "the good colour" is becoming, through the causes and conditions of merit, a king of humans, a wheel-turning king, or a king of the gods and obtaining blessed pleasure; 「好香」 tr. "the good fragrance" is good fame, wealth and rank, and power; 「愚癡人」 tr. "the fool" is 「新發意取相著心菩薩」 tr. "the bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind, grasps at marks, and has an attached mind"; 「食之歡喜」 tr. "eating it with delight" is receiving such wealth and pleasure among gods and humans. As for suffering death or what is equal to death when the food is about to be digested: when wealth and pleasure, being impermanent, break down and scatter, grief leads to death or next to death, and one suffers all manner of affliction. He also gives a twofold explanation: to lose one's own life-faculty is called 「死」 tr. "death", and to lose the things one clings to is called 「死等」 tr. "what is equal to death"; or, because affliction is great, 「失智慧命」 tr. "losing the life of wisdom" is called death, and 「妨行善道」 tr. "obstructing the practice of the wholesome path" is called what is equal to death. The second explanation deserves the closest attention—beyond the suffering of death in the world, there is the death of the wisdom-life and the obstruction of the practice of the path; the poison of grasping at marks reaches all the way into the practitioner's Dharma body and wisdom-life.

12. The four kinds of not-truly and right dedication; the simile of shooting at the ground. The treatise-author explains the four faults: 「不審諦受」 tr. "not carefully and truly receiving" is 「不取其義，但著語言」 tr. "not taking its meaning, but clinging only to the words"; not truly grasping the marks is discriminating not according to the Dharma; not truly reading and reciting is 「忘失句逗」 tr. "forgetting and losing the phrasing and pauses", losing it oneself or receiving it incompletely; not understanding the meaning is 「不得經意」 tr. "not attaining the intent of the sūtra". When a teacher of such small wisdom instructs disciples, he slanders the Buddha. What runs contrary to this is called right dedication. He further sets up a simile to show that right dedication cannot miss: 「譬如射地，無不著時」 tr. "it is like shooting at the ground: there is no time it does not hit"; if one shoots at other things, one may hit or may not hit. 「如諸佛所知隨喜，如射地無不著」 tr. "Rejoicing as the buddhas know is like shooting at the ground, which never fails to hit"; rejoicing by other paths is like shooting at other things. What the Buddha knows is surely the real mark, and the real mark pervades every place, as the ground lies beneath one's feet; so rejoicing by the standard of what the Buddha knows, every arrow hits; relying on one's own view to grasp at marks, whether it hits or not has no standard at all.

13. The sūtra: all dharmas are not bound to the three realms and are not named by the three times. The sūtra text advances into a further realm: form is not bound to the desire realm, the form realm, or the formless realm; 「不繫法者，不名過去、不名未來、不名現在」 tr. "a dharma that is not bound is not named past, not named future, not named present". Feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness; the twelve sense-fields and the eighteen elements; the six perfections; inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas; the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas; suchness, the nature of dharmas, the mark of dharmas, the abiding of dharmas, the position of dharmas, the limit of reality, and the nature of the inconceivable; the aggregates of morality, concentration, wisdom, liberation, and the knowledge and vision of liberation; omniscience of all kinds, the dharma of being free of error, and the practice of constant equanimity—each one is not bound to the three realms and not named by the three times; this dedication, the place dedicated to, and the practitioner, and so on up to the buddhas, the roots of goodness, and the roots of goodness of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, are also all not bound. The preceding text spoke of being apart from marks and of self-nature being apart; here it speaks of not being bound and not being named by the three times: all dharmas, in terms of their real mark, fundamentally do not fall within the bounds of the three realms, nor do they fall into the positions of the three times; so to set up upon them the mark of past roots of goodness and dedicate by grasping at marks loses, at the very root, the ground it stands on.

14. If a dharma is unarisen then there is no dharma; within no dharma there can be no dedication. From not being bound to the three realms, the sūtra presses out the ultimate principle of dedication: since dharmas are not named past, future, or present, 「不可以取相有所得法迴向」 tr. "one cannot dedicate by a dharma that grasps at marks and has something to be attained". Why? 「是色無生。若法無生則無法，無法中不可迴向。」 tr. "This form is unarisen. If a dharma is unarisen then there is no dharma, and within no dharma there can be no dedication." The six perfections, and so on up to the practice of constant equanimity, are likewise. Dedicating in this way, there is no poison. These few sentences are the deepest point of the meaning of the Last Part: because there is no arising there is no dharma; because there is no dharma there is nothing that can be dedicated—this is not cancelling dedication, but cancelling every mark within dedication that could be grasped; precisely because within no dharma there can be no dedication, whoever wishes to dedicate by 「有所得法」 tr. "a dharma with something to be attained" is surely false, while one who accords with the real mark with nothing to be attained—his dedication is true. Dedication without poison takes its name from right here.

15. Wrong dedication and true dedication. The sūtra at once establishes names on both sides: to dedicate by a dharma attained by grasping at marks 「是名邪迴向」 tr. "is called wrong dedication", which the buddhas do not praise; using this wrong dedication one cannot fulfil the six perfections, the four foundations of mindfulness, and so on up to the practice of constant equanimity, cannot purify buddha-worlds or bring beings to maturity, and so cannot attain unsurpassed awakening—because this dedication is mixed with poison. Conversely, one should form this thought: to dedicate the roots of goodness as the buddhas know 「是真迴向」 tr. "is true dedication"; I too should dedicate by this mark of the Dharma, and this is called right dedication. The harm of the wrong is spoken of as extremely grave: it is not merely that the merit is small, but that the three matters on the bodhisattva path—the pure land, the maturing of beings, and becoming a buddha—are all blocked along the way. The judgement between wrong and right is still that one line—as the buddhas know, or as I grasp.

16. The Buddha praises "Excellent!": the linked chain of the dharma one should dedicate. The Buddha himself praises Subhūti: 「善哉！善哉！如汝所為，為作佛事」 tr. "Excellent! Excellent! What you have done is doing the Buddha's work"—he has spoken to the bodhisattvas the dharma they should dedicate, because it is signless, without attainment, without emergence, neither stained nor pure, without any nature of dharmas, the emptiness of specific marks, the constant emptiness of nature, the nature of dharmas, suchness, and the limit of reality. These ten headings run on in one breath, and they are precisely the whole skeleton of the dharma of dedication: from the signless to without attainment, from without attainment to without emergence, entering stage by stage until at last it is the same as the nature of dharmas, suchness, and the limit of reality. This praise at the same time discloses one thing: to speak this dharma of dedication is itself 「作佛事」 tr. "doing the Buddha's work"—talk of the wisdom of emptiness does not overturn merit; it is precisely the family business the Buddha has entrusted.

17. Three levels of weighing: dedication with the mind unattached is supreme. The Buddha sets up three levels of weighing and asks Subhūti: if the beings of the three-thousand great-thousand world all attained the ten wholesome paths, the four dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, the four formless absorptions, and the five supernormal powers, would the merit be much? If they all became srota-āpanna, and so on up to arhats and pratyekabuddhas, and someone made offerings to them for the whole of his life, would the merit be much? If they all aroused the mind of awakening, and each being in worlds of the ten directions as many as the sands of the Ganges made offerings to them for kalpas as many as the sands of the Ganges, would the merit be much? Subhūti three times answers "very much", and at the last level adds that if the merit had shape, the worlds of the ten directions as many as the sands of the Ganges could not contain it. The Buddha judges each time: it does not equal a good man or good woman who, 「於諸善根心不著」 tr. "with the mind not attached to the roots of goodness", dedicates to unsurpassed awakening, which is supreme, foremost, most wondrous, unsurpassed, and without equal; the merit of unattached dedication, compared with the earlier merit, surpasses it a hundred thousand koṭi times, and so on up to what numbers and similes cannot reach. The reason is that the earlier ones, practising the ten wholesome paths and so on up to making offerings to bodhisattvas, all 「取相得法」 tr. "attain dharmas by grasping at marks". The scale of the weighing lies not in the size of the deed, but in whether the mind is attached or unattached.

18. The gods' four praises: the greatest dedication, which does not fall into dual dharmas. The gods of the Four Heavenly Kings with twenty thousand gods join their palms and pay homage to the Buddha; Śakra Devānām Indra with the gods of the Heaven of the Thirty-three makes offerings of flowers, incense, necklaces, and music; the kings of the Yāma, Tuṣita, Delight in Transformation, and Sovereign-over-Others'-Transformations heavens each come with a thousand gods; and with one voice they praise, saying: the greatest dedication of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva, 「以方便力故、以無所得故、以無相法故、以無覺法故」 tr. "because of the power of skilful means, with nothing to be attained, because of the signless dharma, because of the dharma of non-awareness", dedicates the roots of goodness to unsurpassed awakening, and 「不墮二法」 tr. "does not fall into dual dharmas". The Brahmā king with a hundred thousand koṭi nayuta gods, and the gods from the Heaven of Light-Sound up to the Akaniṣṭha heaven, come as well and exclaim at what has never been: the bodhisattva is 「為般若波羅蜜所護」 tr. "protected by prajñāpāramitā", and because of the power of skilful means he surpasses those earlier ones who grasp at marks with something to be attained. The four phrases the gods praise—the power of skilful means, nothing to be attained, the signless, non-awareness—are precisely the unfolding of the power of skilful means of prajñā spoken of earlier; not falling into dual dharmas is not falling into the duality of existence and non-existence, grasping and relinquishing, subject and object. That the gods of the desire realm and the form realm praise with one voice shows that the virtue of this unattached dedication shakes gods and humans.

19. The Buddha tells the gods: rejoicing that grasps at marks and joins together, and supreme rejoicing with five negations. The Buddha tells the gods, making one more level of weighing: suppose the beings of the three-thousand great-thousand world all aroused the mind of awakening and thought of all the roots of goodness of the buddhas of the three times and of the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, from the first arousing of intent up to the abiding of the Dharma, together with the roots of goodness of all other beings—giving, morality, patience, vigour, one-pointedness of mind, and wisdom, dānapāramitā and so on up to prajñā, and the meritorious dharmas of the five aggregates—and joined them all together, rejoiced, and dedicated them, yet 「以取相有所得故」 tr. "because of grasping at marks with something to be attained"; and suppose again someone likewise joined and weighed them together, but 「以無所得故、無二法故、無相法故、不著法故、無覺法故」 tr. "with nothing to be attained, because of non-dual dharmas, because of the signless dharma, because of the unattached dharma, because of the dharma of non-awareness"—this is the supreme rejoicing, and its merit surpasses the former a hundred thousand koṭi times, and so on up to what numbers and similes cannot reach. The roots of goodness rejoiced in on the two sides do not differ by a single word; the difference lies only in the five words of 「無」 tr. "without". Whether rejoicing is superior or inferior depends not on the breadth or narrowness of what is taken as object, but entirely on whether the mind that takes it is attached or unattached—this is the general principle of the meaning of weighing for the whole chapter.

20. How rejoicing is supreme: neither grasping nor relinquishing; as the mark of suchness, the nature of dharmas, the abiding of dharmas, the position of dharmas. Subhūti asks: what is called the supreme rejoicing, and so on up to without equal? The Buddha answers: to think of the dharmas of the three times as 「不取不捨、不念非不念、不得非不得」 tr. "neither grasped nor relinquished, neither thought of nor not thought of, neither found nor not found"; within these dharmas there is no dharma that arises or ceases, nothing defiled or pure; dharmas neither increase nor decrease, neither come nor go, neither join nor scatter, neither enter nor leave; as the marks of the dharmas of the three times, as the mark of suchness, the nature of dharmas, the abiding of dharmas, the position of dharmas, so too do I rejoice, and having rejoiced I dedicate to awakening—this dharma of rejoicing surpasses other rejoicing a hundred thousand koṭi times, and so on up to what numbers and similes cannot reach. Here the practice-aspect of the supreme rejoicing is laid out in full: toward dharmas there is not a hair's breadth of the mark of grasping, relinquishing, attaining, or thinking, and yet one rejoices in accord with the original mark of dharmas. The mind of rejoicing and the real mark of all dharmas are like a seal pressed into clay—this is the real meaning of the word 「最上」 tr. "supreme".

21. Equal to liberation: because it neither arises nor ceases, one will quickly attain awakening. The Buddha further teaches the way of forming the thought of rejoicing: 「布施與解脫等」 tr. "giving is equal to liberation"; morality, patience, vigour, dhyāna, and wisdom are equal to liberation; form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to omniscience of all kinds, and the meritorious dharmas of the five aggregates are all equal to liberation; rejoicing is equal to liberation; the dharmas of the three times, the buddhas of the ten directions, the dedication of the buddhas, the buddhas and their passing into extinction, the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas and their passing into extinction, the mark of the buddhas' Dharma and the marks of all dharmas—all are equal to liberation; and the merit of rejoicing according to the marks of these roots of goodness, which I dedicate, is also equal to liberation—「不生不滅故」 tr. "because it neither arises nor ceases". This is called the supreme rejoicing; one who accomplishes the merit of this rejoicing 「當疾得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "will quickly attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". All dharmas, all noble ones, all practices alike take liberation, which neither arises nor ceases, as their limit of reality; and when rejoicing and dedication are also placed upon this limit of reality, the mind that rejoices and the virtue rejoiced in are equal, of one taste. To regard all things as equal and quickly attain the unsurpassed—this is precisely the great function of the dharma of nothing to be attained.

22. The last level of weighing: dedicating by the power of skilful means in the six perfections surpasses lifelong offerings. The Buddha makes the last level of weighing in the Last Part: suppose that the buddhas and disciples of the ten directions, as many as the sands of the Ganges, were present, and someone made offerings of all that they need for the whole of his life, and after the buddhas' extinction diligently cultivated offerings day and night, and moreover kept morality, patience, vigour, and meditation and cultivated wisdom—all because of grasping at marks with something to be attained; and suppose again someone aroused the intent to seek unsurpassed awakening and, while practising the six perfections, dedicated the roots of goodness 「以不取相、無所得法方便力」 tr. "by the power of skilful means of not grasping at marks, the dharma of nothing to be attained"—this merit is supreme, foremost, most wondrous, unsurpassed, and without equal, surpassing the former a hundred thousand koṭi times, and so on up to what numbers and similes cannot reach. The depth of this level of weighing lies in this: what the former practises is no longer the worldly ten wholesome paths, but offerings to the buddhas and the practice of five of the perfections; yet because he practises them grasping at marks, they still fall short of dedication with nothing to be attained. The concluding words bring it back to the gate of practice: when the bodhisattva practises the six perfections, the roots of goodness should be dedicated by the power of skilful means, because of not grasping at marks and the dharma of nothing to be attained.

23. The treatise explains: not bound to the three realms and not contained in the three times—this is called right dedication. In explaining the fifth sūtra section, the treatise-author first establishes the general mark of right dedication: the bodhisattva should think that all dharmas, from form up to the practice of constant equanimity, 「不繫三界故，三世不攝」 tr. "because they are not bound to the three realms, are not contained in the three times"; the buddhas and their disciples together with all their merits, and 「隨喜心、迴向處、所用迴向法、迴向者」 tr. "the mind of rejoicing, the place dedicated to, the dharma used to dedicate, and the one who dedicates", are likewise—this is called right dedication. He also explains why: that form goes beyond the three realms 「即是色實相，初、後生相不可得」 tr. "is precisely the real mark of form: the mark of arising, first or later, is unfindable", as is said in the chapter "Refuting Arising"; a dharma without arising is precisely without anything existent, so how could a mind of dedication without anything existent dedicate to a mind of awakening without anything existent? This is called dedication without poison, namely dedication that is signless and without attainment. 「雜毒」 tr. "Mixed with poison" means that the buddhas do not praise it, that it cannot fulfil the six perfections and so on, and so on up to its being unable to attain awakening. The mind that dedicates and the awakening dedicated to are alike without anything existent, and so dedication is ultimately pure—the treatise-author nails the meaning of non-arising in the sūtra text onto the real mark.

24. Giving rise to the mind, thinking, and contemplating as the buddhas know; the three sections of a bodhisattva's worship of the buddhas. The treatise-author goes on to make clear: the bodhisattva should think that, as the buddhas of the ten directions and the three times know, so one should give rise to the mind, so think, so contemplate, so dedicate, and 「是功德直至無上道」 tr. "this merit goes straight to the unsurpassed path"; so too do I rejoice and dedicate—this bodhisattva is sure to attain real rejoicing, and his dedication is not in vain. He also gathers up the kinds of dedication in general: this is a brief account of the sections on dedication; a bodhisattva's worship of the buddhas has three sections, 「一者、悔過品，二者、隨喜迴向品，三者、勸請諸佛品」 tr. "first, the section of repentance; second, the section of rejoicing and dedication; third, the section of entreating the buddhas", and spoken at length they are measureless and boundless. What this chapter details is precisely the one section of rejoicing and dedication among the three; repentance and entreaty stand alongside it as ways of worshipping the buddhas, and from this one can see the place of rejoicing and dedication in the bodhisattva's daily observance—it is not abstract talk; it is a regular practice in the same class as repentance and entreaty.

25. Two explanations of "Excellent!": helping the Buddha open the bodhisattva path; because it uses the signless. Why does the Buddha praise Subhūti with "Excellent"? The treatise-author gives two explanations. First: when the Buddha first aroused the mind he vowed to deliver all beings; Subhūti, though an arhat, 「而能助佛說法，開菩薩道」 tr. "is yet able to help the Buddha teach the Dharma and open the bodhisattva path", and so he is praised with "Excellent"—in the body of a śrāvaka he does the Buddha's work, and what is praised is that what he says can open the bodhisattva's path. Second: the Buddha himself states the cause—he has spoken to the bodhisattvas the dharma they should dedicate 「用無相故」 tr. "because it uses the signless"—joining the mark of merit with signless wisdom and dedicating it runs contrary to the grasping at marks above, and so it is called signless. Of the two explanations, one concerns the speaker and one concerns what is spoken: the speaker is a person who helps the Buddha; what is spoken is the signless Dharma; the praise "Excellent" raises both person and Dharma together.

26. The signless is of three kinds: the mark of provisional names, the mark of dharmas, the mark of the signless. The treatise-author opens the meaning of the signless into three levels of discernment. 「假名相」 tr. "The mark of provisional names" is like a carriage, a house, a forest, an army, a being—within the coming together of dharmas there is further this name; 「無明力故」 tr. "because of the power of ignorance" one grasps this mark of provisional names and gives rise to afflictions and karma. 「法相」 tr. "The mark of dharmas" is the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, the eighteen elements, and the like; 「肉眼觀故有，以慧眼觀則無」 tr. "because they are seen by the fleshly eye they exist; seen by the wisdom-eye they do not exist"; dharmas too are false, deceptive, and untrue words, and one should relinquish the mark of dharmas. Leaving these two marks, there remains only 「無相相」 tr. "the mark of the signless"; someone grasps this mark of the signless, pursues it and grasps it as a mark, and 「還生結使」 tr. "fetters arise again", so it too should not be grasped. 「離三種相，故名無相。」 tr. "Because it is apart from the three kinds of marks, it is called signless." Of the three levels, the most crucial is the third: even 「無相」 tr. "the signless" may not be grasped as a mark—this echoes, head to tail, the earlier 「有相是一邊，無相是一邊，離是二邊行中道」 tr. "having marks is one extreme; being without marks is one extreme; leaving these two extremes and walking the middle way", and blocks the practitioner's retreat into clinging to emptiness once more as a thing.

27. The linked chain of meanings: from nothing to be attained to the nature of dharmas, suchness, and the limit of reality. The treatise-author strings the ten headings in the Buddha's praise into one chain of cause and effect: if there is no mark, within it there is 「無所得」 tr. "nothing to be attained"; because there is no attainment there is 「無出」 tr. "no emergence"; a dharma without attainment and without emergence is precisely 「無垢無淨」 tr. "neither stained nor pure"; neither stained nor pure is precisely 「無法性」 tr. "without any nature of dharmas"; without nature is precisely 「自相空」 tr. "the emptiness of specific marks"; the emptiness of specific marks is precisely that the dharma is 「常自性空」 tr. "constantly empty of self-nature"; being constantly empty of self-nature is precisely the same as 「法性、如、實際」 tr. "the nature of dharmas, suchness, and the limit of reality". Because one joins with such a dharma and dedicates the merit of rejoicing, he is praised with "Excellent". He also gives a second cause for the praise "Excellent": the merit of rejoicing greatly benefits beings and has a great result—that is, the level of weighing in which the Buddha told Subhūti of the beings of the three-thousand great-thousand world practising the ten wholesome paths and so on up to the five supernormal powers. One chain running through the ten headings shows that these headings are not ten things side by side, but ten stages of deepening entry into one meaning; and its final return to great benefit shows that ultimate emptiness does not obstruct a great result.

28. The first question and answer: why the gods came in greater and lesser numbers. Question: Why did the gods of two places in the desire realm and the Brahmā king come with many gods, while the other four heavens came with few? Answer: The gods of the Four Heavenly Kings and of the Heaven of the Thirty-three rest upon the earth and are near the Buddha, and moreover their five desires are not equal to those of the higher heavens; when the Buddha was born, when he practised austerities, when he subdued Māra, when he attained the path, and when he turned the wheel of the Dharma, they 「常來供養佛」 tr. "always came to make offerings to the Buddha", and so they are many. The palaces of the other four heavens are in the sky and do not belong to the earth; their five desires are wondrous and their attachment deep, so they cannot come in numbers; though the Tuṣita gods have sharp faculties and delight in the Dharma, in their heaven there is always 「補處菩薩說法」 tr. "the bodhisattva bound to buddhahood in one more birth teaching the Dharma", and so they do not come. 「梵天雖遠，離欲故樂法情深」 tr. "Though the Brahmā heaven is far, because they are free of desire their love of the Dharma is deep", and 「佛為法王」 tr. "the Buddha is the king of the Dharma", and so they come in numbers; moreover the Brahmā king is lord of the form realm and entreated the Buddha to first turn the wheel of the Dharma, so he should come with a great assembly, and the other gods of the form realm are all called Brahmā gods. The question looks like an idle stroke of the brush, yet the answer carries the taste of the Dharma: coming or not coming depends on the depth of attachment and on the love of the Dharma—the more wondrous the five desires, the farther one is from the Dharma.

29. The second question and answer: why supremacy is asked about again—the brief account, and a result without end. Question: Earlier, by all kinds of causes and conditions, it was said that right dedication is precisely the supreme; why is it asked about again now? Answer: Above it was spoken at length in place after place; now it is spoken briefly. That is: all dharmas of the three times and the ten directions one 「決定心知」 tr. "knows with a decided mind", that within these dharmas there is nothing that arises or ceases and so on, that all dharmas are 「不可得、不可念」 tr. "unfindable and not to be thought of"; because they are not found and not thought of, one neither grasps nor relinquishes, and 「入諸法實相中」 tr. "enters the real mark of all dharmas"; one forms this thought—as is the real mark of all dharmas, so too do I dedicate with the merit of rejoicing, 「不分別諸法，不壞法性」 tr. "not discriminating among dharmas, not destroying the nature of dharmas"—this is called the supreme dedication. Why? 「果報常無盡故。」 tr. "Because its result is constantly without end." The extended account passes through every gate; the brief account points straight to the one mind; and why the supreme is supreme is answered in the final sentence—not the nobility of name or rank, but that its result is constantly without end. Dedication with nothing to be attained, precisely because it has no mark that can be exhausted, has merit with no term at which it could be exhausted.

30. The third question and answer: all dharmas each have their own marks; how are they all equal to liberation? Question: The six perfections and the other dharmas each have their own marks, whether marks of form or marks without form; and liberation is of two kinds, 「有為解脫，無為解脫」 tr. "conditioned liberation and unconditioned liberation"—how are they all equal to liberation? Answer: Ordinary people see difference because they contemplate with the fleshly eye and the six consciousnesses in an inverted way; contemplated with the wisdom-eye, all dharmas are false, and 「唯涅槃為實」 tr. "only nirvāṇa is real". Conditioned liberation is called liberation because it 「屬無為、隨無為」 tr. "belongs to the unconditioned and follows the unconditioned"; just as one who has truly attained the path is called a person of the path, while those who have not yet attained the path, whose robes and rules of conduct follow those who have, are also called persons of the path. As nirvāṇa without remainder neither arises nor ceases, neither enters nor leaves, is neither stained nor pure, neither existent nor non-existent, neither permanent nor impermanent, is 「常寂滅相」 tr. "the mark of constant quiescent cessation", where 「心識觀滅、語言道斷」 tr. "the contemplation of mind and consciousness ceases and the way of words is cut off", neither a dharma nor not a dharma, because it uses the mark of there being nothing existent—so, contemplated by the wisdom-eye, all dharmas have this same mark: this is called the six perfections and the rest being equal to liberation. So it is said in the Buddha's Dharma: 「解脫為貴，上智慧貴解脫。」 tr. "Liberation is the precious thing; the highest wisdom prizes liberation." Difference lies in the fleshly eye; equality lies in the wisdom-eye; being equal to liberation is not erasing the marks of dharmas, but seeing that all marks return alike to the reality of there being nothing existent.

31. The five contrasts and the four kinds of people; the conclusion. At the end the Buddha makes the distinction: one person practises the six perfections for immeasurable asaṃkhyeya kalpas and cultivates and gathers roots of goodness in every way using dharmas with something to be attained; another person uses the dharma of nothing to be attained, and simply rejoices with the mind, thinks of the merits of others, and dedicates to the unsurpassed path—the former does not reach one part in a hundred thousand ten-thousand of it. Why? 「先福德有量，今福德無量」 tr. "the former merit is measurable; this merit is immeasurable"; the former is exhaustible, this is inexhaustible; the former is mixed with poison, this is without poison; the former follows birth and death, this follows nirvāṇa; the former is uncertain, perhaps becoming a buddha, perhaps falling back, while this merit is certain to arrive and one is 「必疾作佛」 tr. "sure to make a buddha quickly". The five contrasts, each set pair against pair, gather the meaning of weighing of the whole chapter into one table. Therefore there are four kinds of people: 「凡夫人求世間樂」 tr. "ordinary people seek the pleasure of the world", people of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha vehicles seek the pleasure of nirvāṇa, and the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas seek the pleasure of the Buddha. The final sentence concludes: one should rejoice in this way and give rise to merit, and dedicate it to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, 「如此品中說」 tr. "as is said in this chapter". The practice of the six perfections over many kalpas is no match for one thought of rejoicing with nothing to be attained—not because the practice is small and the mind great, but because something to be attained makes practice exhaustible, while nothing to be attained makes the mind inexhaustible; with the whole chapter having come this far, the four Chinese characters rendered as "rejoicing and dedication" at last have their full weight.

Do Not Misread

Do not read dedication by the mark of passing into extinction as visualising the Buddha's marks and signs. The sūtra teaches dedicating 「如諸佛滅度相」 tr. "as is the mark of the buddhas' passing into extinction", and the mark of passing into extinction is precisely the signless quiescent cessation of nirvāṇa without remainder; the treatise-author explains it as signless, without idle discourse, its nature constantly quiescent and ceased. If one reads it as sketching in the mind a buddha who has passed into extinction and taking him as object in thought, one falls straight back into the sickness of grasping at marks and discriminating, 「諸佛所不許」 tr. "which the buddhas do not permit"; this dedication takes the signless as its mark, not a mark as its mark.

Do not read the simile of food mixed with poison as disparaging merit. In the simile 「食」 tr. "the food" is precisely the merit of rejoicing, fine in both colour and fragrance; neither sūtra nor treatise ever says the food is bad; the poison lies only in the afflictions of craving and views born of grasping at marks. If one reads it as saying that rejoicing and dedication are themselves poisonous and better left undone, one has read the prescription as the case of the disease—throughout, the Last Part teaches right dedication, true dedication, and the supreme rejoicing; when did it ever teach giving up rejoicing? What is removed is the poison; what is kept is the food.

Do not read 「無法中不可迴向」 tr. "within no dharma there can be no dedication" as saying that dedication cannot be established, or need not be done. This sentence blocks dedication that grasps at marks with something to be attained, not dedication itself; immediately afterward the sūtra text says that dedicating in this way there is no poison, and speaks of true dedication and right dedication. A mind of dedication without anything existent dedicates to a mind of awakening without anything existent, and precisely because both ends are without anything existent, dedication is ultimately not in vain; to read it as annihilation and give up the practice of dedication is to swing the blade that breaks attachment against the gate of practice itself.

Do not read 「與解脫等」 tr. "equal to liberation" as levelling the difference between cause and effect, good and evil. Giving being equal to liberation and the five aggregates being equal to liberation is the equality of the real mark seen by the wisdom-eye—all dharmas alike take neither arising nor ceasing as their limit of reality; it is not that, in the events seen by the fleshly eye, giving is the same as not giving, or that defiled and pure are no different. The treatise-author says plainly that the fleshly eye of ordinary people sees difference while the wisdom-eye contemplates equality; if one mixes them together at the level of events, one is passing off the fleshly eye as the wisdom-eye, and falls right into inversion.

Do not read ‘dedication with the mind unattached surpasses offerings’ as permission to slight offerings and good deeds. In the three levels of weighing—the ten wholesome paths, the four dhyānas, offerings to noble ones—the Buddha first sets the seal 「甚多」 tr. "very much" on each and never disparages their merit; what he judges is the height of grasping at marks against being unattached, not a choice between doing the deeds and not doing them. In the last level of weighing, the side that surpasses is precisely the person who practises the six perfections—practice is not given up; attachment must be left. If one reads it as giving up offerings and good deeds, that becomes yet another sickness besides the mixing in of poison.

Do not cling to 「無相」 tr. "the signless" as a mark that can be grasped. The treatise-author singles out the third level: after leaving the mark of provisional names and the mark of dharmas, there remains the mark of the signless, and 「有人取是無相相，隨逐取相，還生結使，是故亦不應取」 tr. "someone grasps this mark of the signless, pursues it and grasps it as a mark, and fetters arise again; therefore it too should not be grasped". Having marks is one extreme, being without marks is one extreme; only leaving the two extremes and walking the middle way is the real mark of the buddhas; if one holds on to the thought ‘I am already signless’, fetters arise again from just this.

Bearing on Practice

Take 「如諸佛所知，我亦如是」 tr. "as the buddhas know, so too do I" as the daily heart-method of rejoicing and dedication. Whenever you rejoice in the merits of others or dedicate the roots of goodness you have cultivated, there is no need to ask yourself what the roots of goodness you take as object look like, or how great the merit is—that is the road of grasping at marks and discriminating; form only one thought: as the buddhas know with their unsurpassed wisdom the real mark of the roots of goodness, so too do I rejoice, so too do I dedicate. The simile of shooting at the ground is fit for daily use: taking what the buddhas know as the standard is like shooting at the ground, which never fails to hit; relying on what one grasps oneself is like shooting at other things, sometimes hitting and sometimes not.

Use the simile of food mixed with poison to examine how you enjoy your merit. When you cultivate merit and hope for fame, wealth and rank, power, and the blessed pleasures of humans and gods, the moment colour and fragrance appear before you is the moment to be most alert: what happens when the food is about to be digested? When wealth and pleasure break down and scatter, there is grief and affliction, even the loss of the life of wisdom and the obstruction of the practice of the wholesome path—the treatise-author describes the signs of the poison taking effect one by one. The remedy is not to refuse to enjoy merit, but not to grasp at marks or attach the mind while enjoying it; the food may be eaten; the poison must be picked out.

Use the five words of 「無」 tr. "without" to gauge the grade of your own rejoicing. Thinking of the same roots of goodness of the buddhas and joining them together in rejoicing, grasping at marks with something to be attained is one road; nothing to be attained, non-dual dharmas, the signless dharma, the unattached dharma, and the dharma of non-awareness is another road, and their merits are a hundred thousand koṭi times apart. In daily life, at the moment of rejoicing and praising, you can test yourself: in this thought is there or is there not the dual mark of subject and object, ‘I am rejoicing, he has merit’? If there is, then though it is good it is mixed; if there is not, then the same rejoicing is the supreme.

Take 「與解脫等」 tr. "equal to liberation" as the entry into the contemplation of equality. While giving, think that giving is equal to liberation; while keeping morality, think that morality is equal to liberation; and so on, when you see others cultivate good and when you see the merits of the buddhas, think of all of them as equal to liberation, because they neither arise nor cease. This contemplation does not destroy the practice of events, yet takes hold directly of the limit of reality of all dharmas; practising one good deed is then of one taste with nirvāṇa; when it has long ripened, the marks of subject and object thin of themselves, and this is precisely the road to quickly attaining awakening.

Use the five contrasts to spur on the direction of your practice. Merit measurable or immeasurable, exhaustible or inexhaustible, mixed with poison or without poison, following birth and death or following nirvāṇa, uncertain or certain to arrive—the judgement of all five contrasts lies wholly in the one thought of something to be attained or nothing to be attained. In putting forth effort there is no need first to seek breadth of practice or length of kalpas; first you must test where this one thought is turned: turned toward something to be attained, the six perfections over many kalpas still follow birth and death; turned toward nothing to be attained, one thought of rejoicing already follows nirvāṇa. What is called being sure to make a buddha quickly—the quickness lies in one turning of the ground of the mind, not in adding event to event.

Further Resonances

What the Last Part carries on from the First Part is a single line running from difficulty to answer. In the First Part Maitreya established the tenet: the merit of rejoicing, dedicated, is supreme, foremost, most wondrous, unsurpassed, and without equal; Subhūti raised a difficulty from ultimate emptiness: the roots of goodness of the past buddhas one thinks of have all ceased; dedicating by grasping at marks, it cannot be found as it is thought of—will one not fall into the three inversions? The First Part also left the skilful means for new trainees: a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind is first taught to rejoice while grasping at marks and gradually gains the power of skilful means, just as fledglings whose wings are not yet grown must not be forced to fly high; and with the mind exhausting and ceasing and entering the real mark, and with the meaning that true dedication is neither right nor wrong, it took up the difficulty of inversion in a first step. The Last Part then unfolds this line to its end: first it lays the foundation of the right answer with rejoicing apart from marks and dedication by the mark of passing into extinction; next it judges the sickness of grasping at marks with the simile of food mixed with poison, establishes the tenet of right dedication with ‘as the buddhas know’, and makes clear with the simile of shooting at the ground that it cannot miss; then, by way of not being bound to the three realms, and a dharma unarisen being no dharma, it pushes the meaning of being apart from marks to the point where there is nothing that can be dedicated, and with a turn of the hand establishes the true dedication that is signless and without attainment; then the Buddha's own three levels of weighing, the gods' four praises, the judgement of the five negations, and the teaching of being equal to liberation raise rejoicing 「心不著」 tr. "with the mind unattached" to its proper place as supreme, foremost, most wondrous, unsurpassed, and without equal—this is precisely the tenet Maitreya established in the First Part, which here passes through the gate of difficulty and gains its real meaning; at the end the treatise-author guards against the sickness of clinging to emptiness with the three kinds of marks, runs through the depth of the ten headings with the linked chain, clears the remaining doubts with three questions and answers, and gathers up the whole chapter with the five contrasts and the four kinds of people. The First Part established the tenet and met a difficulty; the Last Part breaks the difficulty and completes the tenet: why the merit of rejoicing and dedication is supreme lies not in the breadth of the object or the length of the kalpas, but in the one thought of nothing to be attained according with the real mark of all dharmas—because its result is constantly without end. From beginning to end the chapter answers the same question: how a mind without anything existent dedicates to an awakening without anything existent; and where the answer is complete, there is the supreme rejoicing.

Further Resonances

The vein of meaning in the chapter "Rejoicing and Dedication" has something it inherits before it and something it opens after it. What it inherits is the preceding chapter, "Weighing the Gift of Dharma": in that chapter the Buddha and Śakra Devānām Indra weigh, step by step, the merit of the gift of Dharma—「教一閻浮提人行十善道」 tr. "teaching the people of one Jambudvīpa to practise the ten wholesome paths" does not equal 「書持般若波羅蜜經卷與他人，令讀、誦、說」 tr. "writing out and upholding the scroll of the prajñāpāramitā sūtra and giving it to others, causing them to read, recite, and expound it" in the merit obtained, and this unfolds all the way into a graded ascent through the four continents and the three-thousand great-thousand world, and on up to worlds as many as the sands of the Ganges in the ten directions; that the gift of Dharma surpasses the gift of wealth, and that prajñā surpasses all goodness, had already been established in that chapter. This chapter follows on from it and advances one step further: though the gift of Dharma is superior, it is still karma of diligent effort by body and speech. At the very opening of this chapter Maitreya sets up the tenet of rejoicing, whose meaning the treatise-author glosses as 「但以心隨喜」 tr. "merely rejoicing with the mind," and he himself makes clear his intent in taking up the thread—「先七品中，佛命須菩提令說般若，中間帝釋多問、多說功德事」 tr. "In the preceding seven chapters the Buddha commanded Subhūti to speak prajñā; in between, Śakra asked much and spoke much of matters of merit"; now Maitreya, following the Buddha's original intent, turns it back so that Subhūti, by way of the dharma of rejoicing, speaks prajñā at length, and he also checks Śakra's feeling of thinking much of himself over his offerings of flowers and incense: 「菩薩但以心隨喜，則勝聲聞、辟支佛、一切眾生布施等及諸無漏功德，何況華香、供養經卷等」 tr. "The bodhisattva, merely by rejoicing with the mind, surpasses the giving and the like of śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, and all beings, as well as all merits without outflows—how much more flowers and incense, offerings to the scroll of the sūtra, and the like!" The preceding chapter pushed the weighing of merit to the limit of the gift of Dharma; this chapter then overturns the whole frame of reference of the weighing—victory and defeat no longer lie in the breadth or narrowness of what is given, but in whether the mind that can dedicate has something to be attained or nothing to be attained. As for what it opens, the chapter's end already shows the first signs of it: this chapter ends with the judgement of the five pairs of difference and the four kinds of persons, and the next chapter, "Illumination," opens precisely with Śāriputra following on from this to ask—the bodhisattva, being protected by prajñāpāramitā, by the power of skilful means, with regard to the roots of goodness of the buddhas of the three times, 「一切和合隨喜」 tr. "gathers them all together and rejoices," and dedicates them to the unsurpassed path; 「以是因緣故，我問是事」 tr. "for this reason I ask about this matter." From this is drawn out the broad praise that prajñā can illuminate all dharmas and that one should worship prajñā as one worships the World-Honored One, and with 「譬如生盲人，若百、若千、若百千而無前導，不能趣道、入城」 tr. "It is like people blind from birth, whether a hundred, a thousand, or a hundred thousand, who, without a guide in front, cannot set out on the road and enter the city," the five perfections apart from prajñā are likened to being without a guide. This chapter says that rejoicing and dedication must rely on the power of skilful means of prajñā to be free of poison; the next chapter then reveals exclusively the honour of this prajñā itself—and the vein of meaning flows on downward from this.

Among the later ancient masters who read the great sūtra that this chapter explains, the one whose approach is most complete composed a line-by-line commentary on this great sūtra, and for this chapter too he left an explanation. His work heads this chapter 「隨喜品第三十九」 tr. "Chapter Thirty-nine, Rejoicing," the same as the chapter name of the great sūtra it explains, and different from the combined name 「隨喜迴向」 tr. "Rejoicing and Dedication" in this treatise's base text—for the name of this one chapter, with rejoicing and dedication now named singly and now named together, the transmitted texts of old had already laid both side by side; this is the first thing worth recording. In this chapter his commentary analyses back and forth, in particular, rejoicing and dedication, and rejoicing and repentance, posing the question 「隨喜如是，懺悔云何」 tr. "Rejoicing being thus, what of confession and repentance?", and running the contemplation of prajñā through both repentance and rejoicing—all this records his approach only, without judging higher or lower. There is another ancient master, who once composed a commentary on this treatise itself; his work survives today in incomplete fascicles, and this chapter happens to be among those that survive: both the table of contents and the main text are headed 「釋隨喜迴向品第三十九」 tr. "Explaining Chapter Thirty-nine, Rejoicing and Dedication," entirely the same as the chapter name in this treatise's base text—this records it faithfully according to the actual state of the incomplete fascicles. As for how deeply the meaning of this chapter has served the practice-rites of later ages: the treatise-author himself says in this chapter 「菩薩禮佛有三品：一者、悔過品，二者、隨喜迴向品，三者、勸請諸佛品」 tr. "The bodhisattva's worship of the Buddha has three parts: first, the part of repentance; second, the part of rejoicing and dedication; third, the part of entreating the buddhas." Those in later ages who set out practice-rites of worship and repentance and established the heading of the five repentances say, where they speak of dedication, 「我順諸法，隨喜迴向，如三世諸佛所知、所見、所許」 tr. "I, according with all dharmas, rejoice and dedicate, as the buddhas of the three times know, see, and permit," and name it 「真實正迴向」 tr. "true and real right dedication"—the same eye as this chapter's right dedication, 「如諸佛所知」 tr. "as the buddhas know"; there are also those who expound the meaning that rejoicing and dedication surpass the self-directed practice of the two vehicles, and this too echoes the intent of Maitreya's setting up of the tenet in this chapter. All this records how widely it has spread and how closely the themes are related; it does not judge whether they quote it word for word, and does not judge higher or lower.

Bringing this whole line of further resonances back to this chapter, what the ancient masters have preserved and what this treatise itself says are one and the same thing: rejoicing and dedication is not the setting up of a separate merit outside all merits, but the gathering of all merits into the single mind of nothing to be attained. 「譬如美食雜毒」 tr. "It is like fine food mixed with poison": rejoicing that grasps at marks is not without merit, yet within its result sorrow and suffering already lie hidden. 「譬如射地，無不著時；若射餘物，或著、或不著」 tr. "It is like shooting at the ground, which never fails to hit; if one shoots at other things, one may hit or may not hit"—rejoicing as the buddhas know, one never fails to hit. This chapter itself had long since pushed this meaning into the place of contemplation and the place of fruition: merit is apart from the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, and the eighteen elements; the merit of rejoicing is apart in its self-nature, and one practises the prajñāpāramitā whose mark is being apart; form, up to the practice of constant equanimity, is not bound to the three realms and is not named by the three times; because it is unarisen there is no dharma, and within no dharma there can be no dedication; 「布施與解脫等」 tr. "giving is equal to liberation," and so on up to the marks of all dharmas, all equal to liberation, 「不生不滅故」 tr. "because they neither arise nor cease." And its fruit is the five pairs of difference—formerly measurable, now immeasurable; formerly exhaustible, now inexhaustible; formerly mixed with poison, now without poison; formerly following birth and death, now following nirvāṇa; formerly unassured, now sure to make a buddha quickly. The reason the merit of rejoicing is supreme and foremost does not lie in any economy of the mind's effort, but in this mind not running counter to the real mark of all dharmas, 「果報常無盡故」 tr. "because its result is ever inexhaustible."

Therefore what the chapter "Rejoicing and Dedication" finally leaves behind is a way of asking that can be used again and again: the merit I am cultivating at this moment, the goodness I am rejoicing in, the mind I am dedicating—is it fine food arisen from grasping at marks, with poison lying hidden in it, or the right dedication that is as the buddhas know, like shooting at the ground and never failing to hit? When I see others cultivate merit, is what arises in my mind the feeling of thinking much of myself that weighs them against me, or the rejoicing of 「一切眾生行善，與我相似，是我同伴」 tr. "All beings who practise goodness are like me; they are my companions"? When I take this merit and turn it toward the unsurpassed path, am I calculating the breadth or narrowness of what I take as object and whether what I think of can be found, or do I know that the objects and the matters are both empty, that 「無有法能迴向法」 tr. "there is no dharma that can dedicate a dharma," and yet the dedication is not in vain? Answer these few questions well in every act of rejoicing, and 「隨喜迴向」 tr. "rejoicing and dedication" is not a Dharma-gate of convenient economy outside body and speech, but the power of skilful means of prajñā made present in its entirety—merely rejoicing with the mind, with nothing to be attained, its merit is supreme, foremost, most wondrous, unsurpassed, and without equal.

Illumination: Why Prajñā Can Illuminate All Dharmas and Receives the Praise of Sixteen Phrases on Its Virtues; Why Making Offerings to Prajñā Should Be as Making Offerings to the World-Honored One; Why the Five Perfections Apart from Prajñā Are Like the Blind without a Guide; How Prajñā Arises Because Form and the Rest Do Not Arise, and How It Joins yet Joins with Nothing; Why the Thought of Joining or Not Joining and the Thought That Grasps the Mark of Emptiness Both Lose Prajñā; and Why Prajñā Is Called Mahāpāramitā yet Does Not Make Dharmas Great or Small, Possessed of Power or without Power

What Is Being Asked

This chapter’s name is 「照明品」 tr. "the chapter Illumination," taken precisely from the first phrase of Śāriputra’s praise of prajñā at the head of the chapter—prajñāpāramitā 「能照一切法」 tr. "can illuminate all dharmas," because it is 「畢竟淨」 tr. "ultimately pure." At the end of the previous chapter the Buddha, Maitreya, Subhūti, and Śakra together spoke of the meaning of rejoicing and dedication; as this chapter opens, Śāriputra, long silent, rises from his seat and seeks the Buddha’s confirmation, ‘this is prajñāpāramitā,’ and at once brings out, one after another, sixteen phrases praising its virtues—it can illuminate all dharmas, it is to be worshipped, it is not attached to the three realms, it removes all darkness, and so on up to it can turn the wheel of the Dharma, it can show the nature of all dharmas—and asks: toward such a prajñā, how should one make offerings? The Buddha’s reply sets the height of the whole chapter at a stroke: 「當如供養世尊」 tr. "as one makes offerings to the World-Honored One," because 「世尊即是般若波羅蜜，般若波羅蜜即是世尊」 tr. "the World-Honored One is prajñāpāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā is the World-Honored One." (The chapter has other names in the various transmitted texts; that is a matter for the Apparatus, and is examined in detail there.)

From this one question and answer the whole chapter spreads out into three layers of question. The first layer: Śakra asks why Śāriputra asks this, and why he praises prajñā alone—which draws out the simile of the men blind from birth and the similes of the mineral powder and of the general: the five perfections apart from prajñā are like a hundred thousand blind men without a guide, unable to set out on the road and enter the city; the six matters come together, yet the power of prajñā is great, and so the five dharmas obtain through it the name pāramitā. The second layer: Śāriputra asks how prajñā is to arise, and with what dharma the prajñā that has arisen joins—the Buddha answers that prajñā arises because form and all the other dharmas do not arise, that prajñā joins with nothing, and so on up to not joining even with sarvajñā; not grasping, not receiving, not abiding, not attached, not cutting off—joining thus, it joins with nothing; and further it is examined and settled: to form the thought of joining or not joining loses prajñā, and the thought that grasps the mark of emptiness also loses prajñā; having faith in prajñā, one does not have faith in form or in any dharma, because they are unfindable. The third layer: Subhūti praises prajñā as called mahāpāramitā—prajñā, toward form and so on up to the buddhas, does not make great or small, joined or dispersed, measureless or not measureless, broad or narrow, possessed of power or without power; for one with the mark of something to be attained there is no anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. The treatise-author explains these three layers one by one, and at the end gathers the gate of practice together with ‘practising joined with the five perfections, or practising alone apart from them—each has its fault.’ These three layers are exactly what the sūtra and treatise of this chapter must account for passage by passage.

Passage by Passage

1. The Buddha with his own mouth confirms the name of prajñā. At the head of the chapter Śāriputra says to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! This is prajñāpāramitā?’ The Buddha answers: ‘This is prajñāpāramitā.’ The question and answer are a single sentence each, yet they are the threshold of the whole chapter—Śāriputra, having heard out in silence the meaning of rejoicing in the previous chapter, first asks the Buddha to confirm with his own mouth that the dharma he is about to praise is prajñā, and only then dares to pour out the sixteen phrases praising its virtues. The Buddha approves his words and says 「是」 tr. "This is," and so all the praise, questioning, and examination below have a basis confirmed by the Buddha. This confirmation also foreshadows where the whole chapter is heading: the prajñā that is praised is not some other thing, but precisely that very illumination of wisdom by which rejoicing and dedication can leave the real mark undestroyed.

2. The head of the sixteen phrases of praise—it can illuminate and is ultimately pure, it is to be worshipped, it is not attached to the three realms, it removes all darkness. Śāriputra first praises prajñā as 「能照一切法」 tr. "can illuminate all dharmas," because it is 「畢竟淨」 tr. "ultimately pure"—this phrase is the source of the chapter name 「照明」 tr. "Illumination": the reason its illumination reaches everywhere is exactly that in its substance it is ultimately pure, grasping at nothing, as a mirror, being clean, has nothing it does not show. Next he praises it as to be worshipped—such a dharma should of itself receive the reverence of all; next, as not stained by attachment to the three realms—it illuminates and yet does not fall into what it illuminates; next, as removing all darkness, and the sūtra itself notes the reason: because all afflictions and all views are removed and destroyed. Read together, the four phrases first set up the purity of the substance of illumination, and then set up the honour, the separateness, and the breaking power of its function; they are the general outline of the sixteen phrases of praise.

3. Supreme among the dharmas that aid the path, peace and security, able to give light. The next three virtues turn to the limbs of the path: prajñā is 「一切助道法中最上」 tr. "supreme among all the dharmas that aid the path"—all the dharmas that aid the path, such as the thirty-seven limbs of the path, take wisdom as their guide, and so prajñā stands supreme; 「安隱」 tr. "peace and security"—because it can cut off all fear, suffering, and vexation; the root of fear lies in inversion, and the illumination of wisdom breaks inversion, and so there is peace; 「能與光明」 tr. "able to give light"—because it is adorned with the five eyes; from the fleshly eye up to the Buddha eye, all obtain their clarity and function through prajñā. The three phrases pass from the limbs of the path to the ground of the mind to the eyes, praising prajñā as the one who gives strength to every function of the one who cultivates the path.

4. Able to show and guide away from the two extremes; it is omniscience of all kinds. Next he praises prajñā as 「能示導墮邪道眾生」 tr. "able to show and guide beings who have fallen onto wrong paths," because it is apart from the two extremes—those who have fallen onto wrong paths have lost the right road, and prajñā does not fall into the two extremes of existence and non-existence, and so it can point them back to the middle way; he further praises prajñā as 「一切種智」 tr. "omniscience of all kinds," because all afflictions and their habit-energies are cut off together. The former phrase is gathering in others; the latter is the utmost of the fruit: where prajñā guides people is exactly toward the ground of omniscience of all kinds, where afflictions and residual habits are cut off without remainder; the one who can guide and the place arrived at here join into a single virtue.

5. The mother of the bodhisattvas, neither arising nor ceasing, far from birth and death. Next he praises prajñā as 「諸菩薩摩訶薩母」 tr. "the mother of the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas," because it can give birth to the dharmas of the buddhas—what makes a bodhisattva a bodhisattva is that giving birth to the Buddha’s dharmas is his lifeline, and so prajñā is called mother; 「不生不滅」 tr. "neither arising nor ceasing," because of the emptiness of specific marks—in its substance its specific marks is originally empty, and so there is no arising or ceasing to be found; 「遠離生死」 tr. "far from birth and death," because it is neither permanent nor annihilated—it falls neither into the extreme of permanence nor into the extreme of annihilation, and so stands clear of the stream of birth and death. The three phrases pass from being able to give birth, to the emptiness of the substance, to leaving the round of transmigration; the meaning of mother and the meaning of emptiness are raised together and do not hinder each other: precisely because it neither arises nor ceases, it can give birth to all the dharmas of the buddhas.

6. Acting as protector for those without refuge, complete in power, able to turn the wheel of the Dharma, able to show the nature of all dharmas. The last four virtues: prajñā 「無救者作護」 tr. "acts as protector for those without refuge," because it gives all precious jewels—for those without support, the jewel of the Dharma is the ultimate support; 「具足力」 tr. "complete in power," because nothing can break or destroy it; 「能轉三轉十二行法輪」 tr. "able to turn the wheel of the Dharma of three turnings and twelve aspects," because all dharmas neither turn nor return—the turning of the wheel of the Dharma is established precisely on the real mark of dharmas, which neither turn nor return; 「能示諸法性」 tr. "able to show the nature of all dharmas," because of the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas. Here the sixteen phrases of praise come to a close: from the function of protecting beings and the power that cannot be destroyed, they return to turning the wheel of the Dharma and showing the nature of dharmas, the family work of the Buddha—to praise prajñā is to praise the whole of what the Buddha practises.

7. Making offerings to prajñā should be as making offerings to the World-Honored One—the World-Honored One is prajñā. Śāriputra asks: toward such a prajñā, how should one make offerings? The Buddha answers: 「當如供養世尊。禮般若波羅蜜，當如禮世尊」 tr. "As one makes offerings to the World-Honored One. One should worship prajñāpāramitā as one worships the World-Honored One"—and the reason is this: the World-Honored One is not different from prajñā, and prajñā is not different from the World-Honored One; 「世尊即是般若波羅蜜，般若波羅蜜即是世尊」 tr. "the World-Honored One is prajñāpāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā is the World-Honored One." This is the weightiest sentence of the whole chapter: the utmost of offering lies not in ritual objects but in recognising that the Dharma and the Buddha are not two; to revere prajñā to its utmost is to revere that by which the Buddha is the Buddha.

8. Within prajñā are born the worthy and noble of the three vehicles and all the dharmas of the buddhas. The Buddha goes on to state the reason himself: within this prajñā are born the buddhas, bodhisattvas, pratyekabuddhas, arhats, anāgāmins, sakṛdāgāmins, and srota-āpannas; there are born the ten wholesome paths, the four dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, the four formless absorptions, and the five supernormal powers, inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eight limbs of the noble path; there are born the Buddha’s ten powers, the eighteen unshared dharmas, great kindness and great compassion, and omniscience of all kinds. Of all the positions of the ordinary, the worthy, and the noble, and of all the wholesome things of the world and beyond the world, there is not one that does not come forth from within prajñā—this is why ‘making offerings to prajñā is as making offerings to the World-Honored One’: prajñā is the place from which all the worthy and noble and all the dharmas of the buddhas are born.

9. Śakra asks the cause and condition—Śāriputra himself sets out the meaning of rejoicing and dedication. Śakra thinks to himself: why does Śāriputra ask this? Śāriputra answers: the bodhisattva is guarded by prajñā, and by the power of 「漚和拘舍羅」 tr. "upāya-kauśalya" (skilful means), he joins together all the roots of goodness made by the buddhas of the three times, from the first arousing of the mind up to the abiding of their Dharma, and rejoices in them all, dedicating them to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi—it is for this cause and condition that he asks. This answer sews this chapter to the previous one: that rejoicing and dedication can gather the good of the three times without destroying the real mark depends entirely on the power of prajñā’s skilful means, and so the question about making offerings to prajñā comes precisely in continuation of the meaning of the previous chapter.

10. The simile of the men blind from birth—with prajñā as guide, the five perfections obtain the name pāramitā. Śāriputra continues: prajñā surpasses dāna, śīla, kṣānti, vīrya, and dhyāna pāramitā. It is like men blind from birth, whether a hundred, a thousand, or a hundred thousand: with no one to guide them in front, they cannot set out on the road and cannot enter the city; the five perfections apart from prajñā are like the blind without a guide, unable to set out on the path and unable to attain omniscience of all kinds. If they obtain prajñā as their guide, 「五波羅蜜名為有眼」 tr. "the five perfections are called possessed of eyes," and through being guided they obtain the name 「波羅蜜」 tr. "pāramitā." The point of the simile is most apt: each of the five perfections has its own capacity for its work, as the blind man has his own hands and feet; what is lacking is only the eye that sees the road—what settles the direction and distinguishes the wrong from the right is prajñā alone.

11. Śakra’s challenge and the answer—abiding in prajñā, one can fully accomplish the five perfections. Śakra asks in return: if any one perfection such as giving is missing, the other five do not obtain the name pāramitā; evidently the six perfections accomplish one another—why praise prajñā alone? Śāriputra first approves his words—it is indeed so—and then answers his real point: it is only when the bodhisattva abides within prajñāpāramitā that he can fully accomplish the five perfections of dāna, śīla, kṣānti, vīrya, and dhyāna; for this reason prajñā among the five perfections is 「最上、第一、最妙、無上、無與等」 tr. "supreme, foremost, most wondrous, unsurpassed, and without equal." That they support one another is a fact, and that there is higher and lower is also a fact: what makes the perfections become perfections is prajñā.

12. How should prajñā arise—because form and all the other dharmas do not arise, prajñā arises. Śāriputra turns to ask: how should prajñā be given rise to? The Buddha answers: 「色不生故，般若波羅蜜生」 tr. "Because form does not arise, prajñāpāramitā arises"; because feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, giving and so on up to meditation, inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eight limbs of the noble path, and the Buddha’s ten powers and so on up to omniscience and omniscience of all kinds do not arise, prajñā arises—because all these dharmas do not arise, prajñā should arise. This is the pivotal sentence of the meaning of this chapter: the arising of prajñā is not an arising on some dharma that exists by dependent origination; it arises exactly where one illuminates and sees that dharmas do not arise; non-arising is what is illuminated, and the illumination of wisdom, taking this as its object, is set up and named arising.

13. Does not originate, does not arise, is not found, is not lost. Śāriputra presses further: what is it that because form does not arise prajñā arises? The Buddha answers: because form does not originate, does not arise, is not found, and is not lost, and so on up to because all dharmas do not originate, do not arise, are not found, and are not lost, prajñā arises. The four phrases in a linked ring take 「不生」 tr. "non-arising" apart to show it: not originating is not seeing it appear from conditions; not arising is not seeing it come to birth as a real substance; not found is that when its fixed mark is sought it is utterly unfindable; not lost is that, since nothing is found, nothing is lost either. Prajñā is set up exactly in the place of these four ‘nots,’ and so the arising of prajñā is in truth the illumination of non-arising becoming present.

14. With what dharma does the arisen prajñā join—it joins with nothing. Śāriputra asks: with what dharma does the prajñā that has arisen in this way join? The Buddha answers: 「無所合，以是故得名般若波羅蜜」 tr. "It joins with nothing, and for this reason it obtains the name prajñāpāramitā"—it does not join with unwholesome or wholesome dharmas, does not join with worldly or world-transcending dharmas, does not join with those with outflows or without outflows, does not join with those with offence or without offence, does not join with the conditioned or the unconditioned. The sūtra itself makes the reason clear: prajñā does not arise in order to obtain dharmas, and so it joins with nothing among dharmas. All five pairs are dispelled together, showing that prajñā belongs to no single class of dharmas; precisely because it belongs to nothing, it becomes the wisdom that reaches the other shore.

15. Nor does it join with sarvajñā, nor is it found. Śakra asks further: does prajñā not join even with sarvajñā (omniscience)? The Buddha answers: it neither joins nor is found—「般若波羅蜜不如名字、不如相、不如起作法合」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā does not join according to names, according to marks, according to dharmas that originate and act." Not joining with and not finding even sarvajñā, this fruit of omniscience, dispels the last and most excellent realm that could be held on to: prajñā does not join as names do, by designation; does not join as marks do, by grasping; does not join as dharmas that originate and act do, by fabrication. At this Śakra exclaims 「未曾有也」 tr. "It has never been before!"—prajñā arises precisely because all dharmas do not originate, do not arise, are not found, and are not lost.

16. Not grasping, not receiving, not abiding, not attached, not cutting off—joining thus, it joins with nothing. Śakra asks: then how does it join now? The Buddha answers: 「若菩薩摩訶薩如不取、不受、不住、不著、不斷，如是合，亦無所合」 tr. "If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva, as not grasping, not receiving, not abiding, not attached, and not cutting off, joins thus, then he also joins with nothing"—prajñā joins with all dharmas and also joins with nothing. This is the proper answer to the meaning of 「合」 tr. "joining" in the whole chapter: it is not being sealed off and untouched, but meeting all dharmas with a mind of these five ‘nots’; meeting them and not grasping, and so it is called joining and yet joining with nothing. Joining and joining with nothing are here not two separate pieces; they are exactly the two faces of one mind.

17. The thought of joining or not joining and the thought of empty, hollow, and not firm both abandon prajñā. Subhūti goes on to examine and settle two faults: if a bodhisattva practising prajñā forms the thought ‘prajñā either joins with all dharmas or does not join,’ he abandons prajñā and is far from prajñā; the Buddha then speaks one more layer—if one forms the thought ‘prajñā is without anything existent, empty and hollow, not firm,’ this too is abandoning prajñā and being far from prajñā. The former fails by discriminating the marks of joining and not joining; the latter fails by grasping 「空」 tr. "emptiness" again as a mark. The two faults raised together are the finest barrier in this chapter: having said ‘joins with nothing,’ one must not take ‘joins with nothing’ as a view; having said emptiness, one must not take emptiness as something attained.

18. Having faith in prajñā, one does not have faith in form and so on up to omniscience of all kinds—because they are unfindable. Subhūti asks: to have faith in prajñā is to have faith in what dharma? The Buddha answers: 「信般若波羅蜜，則不信色」 tr. "Having faith in prajñāpāramitā, one does not have faith in form," does not have faith in feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to not having faith in omniscience of all kinds. This saying is startling, and so the Buddha himself explains the reason: 「色不可得故，信般若波羅蜜，不信色」 tr. "Because form is unfindable, having faith in prajñāpāramitā, one does not have faith in form," and so on up to: because omniscience of all kinds is unfindable, one does not have faith in omniscience of all kinds. Not having faith is not wiping out the matter; it is not holding them as dharmas with a fixed nature that can be found; to have faith in prajñā is to have faith in the real mark of the unfindability of dharmas, and so on each and every dharma one does not set up a grasping of faith.

19. The treatise explains the head of the chapter—Śāriputra, taking up the meaning of rejoicing, gives rise to joy and praise. The treatise-author first sets out how the scene came about: in the previous chapter the Buddha, Maitreya, Subhūti, and Śakra together spoke of the meaning of rejoicing, and Śāriputra listened in silence; hearing that the meaning of rejoicing in prajñā is very deep, immeasurable and boundless, and of great benefit to beings, though he himself had exhausted his outflows and was at rest in quiescent extinction, he still gave rise to a joyful mind, rose from his seat, joined his palms, and said to the Buddha—what can make rejoicing, cut off all idle discourse, and benefit immeasurable beings, leading them into the Buddha path, is prajñā. The Buddha approved his words, and so said 「是」 tr. "This is." One whose outflows are exhausted is originally without gladness or sorrow, yet still rises and praises for the sake of this dharma—which shows exactly how deep what he praises is.

20. Explaining ultimate purity—illuminating all five kinds of Dharma treasury. The treatise explains the first virtue: within prajñā the real mark of all dharmas is spoken; within the real mark there is no stain or turbidity of idle discourse, and so it is called 「畢竟清淨」 tr. "ultimately pure"; because it is ultimately pure, it can illuminate all the five kinds of Dharma treasury—the past, the future, the present, the unconditioned, and the inexpressible. The pervasiveness of its illumination comes not from the strength of a light, but from the stainlessness of its substance: when stains are exhausted nothing stands in between, and so the Dharma treasuries of the three times, of the unconditioned, and even of the inexpressible are all within its illumination. This is the most apt gloss on 「能照一切法，畢竟淨故」 tr. "can illuminate all dharmas, because it is ultimately pure."

21. Explaining the two meanings of omniscience of all kinds. The treatise explains 「一切種智」 tr. "omniscience of all kinds" in two ways: first, the bodhisattva abides in the vajra samādhi, cuts off the subtle residual habits of all afflictions so that none remain, and attains unobstructed liberation, and so it is called omniscience of all kinds—the name is set up from the virtue of cutting off; second, knowing the general and particular marks of all dharmas is the cause and condition of omniscience of all kinds, and so it is called omniscience of all kinds—the name is set up from the virtue of knowledge. The cutting off of habit-energies without remainder is its purity; knowing both the general and the particular is its clarity; under one name the two virtues of cutting off and of knowledge complete each other, answering exactly to the sūtra’s praise above, ‘because all afflictions and their habit-energies are cut off.’

22. Explaining turning the wheel of the Dharma and showing the nature of dharmas—neither turning nor returning, apart from existence and apart from non-existence. The treatise explains 「能轉三轉十二行法輪」 tr. "able to turn the wheel of the Dharma of three turnings and twelve aspects": because within prajñā there is no self-nature, it teaches that dharmas do not turn within birth and death and do not return into nirvāṇa—because they do not arise they do not turn, and because they do not cease they do not return; the turning of the wheel of the Dharma is established precisely on this not turning and not returning. It further explains 「能示諸法性」 tr. "able to show the nature of all dharmas": all dharmas fall into two portions, existent or non-existent; within prajñā existence should not be grasped and non-existence should not be grasped either; to be apart from this existence and non-existence is the nature of dharmas. Turning without turning, showing while being apart from the extremes—the two virtues come forth from one source.

23. The signless dharma and the proud mind—why Śāriputra asks about offering. The treatise-author points out the deep intent of the question about offering: prajñā 「是無相相」 tr. "is the mark of the signless"—it takes being without mark as its mark; some people, whose minds are not yet ripened, seek a fixed mark in prajñā and cannot find one, and so give rise to a proud mind that slights it. Śāriputra asks precisely for such people: how should one make offerings? The signless dharma is the one most easily slighted by shallow minds—it cannot be seen, cannot be touched, has no mark to grasp, and so they suspect it is not worth honouring. This question is asked on behalf of all whose minds are not yet ripened.

24. As making offerings to the Buddha—attached to the mark of beings, thin in feeling toward the precious Dharma; the Buddha and prajñā are equal and without difference. The treatise explains the Buddha’s answer: the Buddha teaches that one should make offerings as to the Buddha, because people from long ago have been deeply attached to the mark of beings and are thin in feeling toward the precious Dharma—revering a person is easy, revering the Dharma is hard, and so he uses the rite of making offerings to the Buddha to teach them to revere the Dharma. When the wise contemplate it, the Buddha and prajñā are equal and without difference; the reason is: prajñā, cultivated and gathered, turns into omniscience. Here the Buddha himself states the cause and condition: from within prajñā are born the worthy and noble, the ten wholesome paths, and the other dharmas of the world and beyond the world, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds. When the Dharma is accomplished, that is the Buddha; and so to revere the Dharma is to revere the Buddha.

25. Explaining Śakra’s thought and Śāriputra’s own statement of the cause. The treatise explains why Śakra formed his thought: Śāriputra is one whose outflows are exhausted and who is free of desire, yet he praises prajñā as fervently as someone attached to the Dharma; Śakra doubts it and asks him. Śāriputra himself states the cause: because the bodhisattva is guarded by prajñā, by the power of skilful means he can dedicate the merit of rejoicing without breaking the mark of prajñāpāramitā—this matter is very rare, and so he honours prajñā and asks the Buddha how to make offerings. Rejoicing is gathering merit; prajñā is illuminating emptiness; to gather merit and not destroy the mark of emptiness is exactly what is rare, and exactly what is worthy of reverence.

26. Question and answer one—why speak of a hundred thousand blind men. The treatise sets up a question: the five perfections ought to be likened to five blind men, so why does it go so far as to say 「百千」 tr. "a hundred thousand"? The answer has three meanings: first, what is spoken of here is their force, not how many or few the people are; second, if it were said that only five persons are guided, that would not be worth valuing, and so it says a hundred thousand; third, the perfections are in themselves many, as the Samādhi of the Auspicious Kalpa says there are eighty-four thousand kinds of pāramitā, and spoken of broadly they are immeasurable. The simile takes the force and not the number—blind men without a guide, a hundred thousand alike, are stuck; a crowd that has a guide, a hundred thousand alike, go forward: this shows exactly that the power of prajñā’s single guiding reaches all the practices.

27. Question and answer two—giving also has eyes, so why liken it to having none. It asks again: dānapāramitā also has eyes—it has faith that there are offence and merit, and breaks ignorance such as wrong views, and so is able to give—why still liken it to having no eyes? The answer: 「布施中，智慧是客來，非正體」 tr. "within giving, wisdom is a guest that has come, not the proper substance"; just as the four great elements are always joined together and cannot be separated, the perfections joining together are also like this. Within giving there is indeed a share of wisdom, but it is a guest that accompanies it, not the proper substance of giving; with respect to its proper substance, giving itself does not possess the eye that discerns the real mark. That they join and cannot be separated is a fact; that the positions of guest and host cannot be confused is also a fact.

28. Two explanations of the road and the city. The treatise explains the words in the simile 「不能趣道、入城」 tr. "cannot set out on the road or enter the city": the road is the path of the bodhisattva’s ten grounds; the city is omniscience of all kinds and the other dharmas of the buddhas. Again, the road is the eight limbs of the noble path; the city is nirvāṇa. One simile with two explanations reaches both the great and the small ways: in terms of the bodhisattva path, what one sets out toward is the ten grounds and what one enters is the city of the Buddha’s dharmas; in terms of the common way, what one sets out on is the eightfold right path and what one enters is the city of nirvāṇa. Whichever explanation is taken, one needs someone with eyes to guide; what the simile points to is throughout the guiding work of prajñā.

29. The proper extension of the simile of the blind men obtaining a guide—they cannot even attain the two vehicles, let alone the unsurpassed path. The treatise extends the meaning of the simile: although the blind man has the strength of hands and feet, he cannot reach anywhere at will; when he obtains someone with eyes to show and guide him, then wherever he wishes to go he can accomplish it. Although the five perfections each have a capacity for their work, without obtaining prajñā to show and guide them, they cannot even attain the two vehicles, let alone the unsurpassed path! Because they obtain prajñā as guide, they obtain the name pāramitā, all the way to accomplishing the Buddha path. The strength of hands and feet is likened to the functions the five perfections themselves possess; the guidance of the eyes is likened to the discerning illumination of prajñā; it is not that strength is lacking, but without eyes strength does not become a journey—this simile says all there is to say about the one word 「將導」 tr. "guide."

30. The simile of the mineral powder and the simile of the general—because the power of prajñā is great, the five dharmas obtain their name. Śakra challenges again: you yourself say that the perfections join together and assist one another, as the four great elements are not separated, so prajñā too depends on the five dharmas—why say only that it is because of prajñā that the five dharmas obtain the name pāramitā? The answer: although the six matters join together and assist one another, 「但般若波羅蜜力大故，五法因得波羅蜜名字」 tr. "it is only because the power of prajñāpāramitā is great that the five dharmas obtain through it the name pāramitā." It is like blending a medicinal powder: each of the many medicines has its power, yet the mineral medicine has the greatest force, and so it is called a mineral powder; again, it is like a great army crushing the enemy: every man has his strength, yet the general’s strength is great, and the name of the victory goes to the general. Within joining together there are of course greater and lesser powers, and the name is set up according to the one of great power—the joining together is not set aside, and yet the sole honour is established.

31. Contemplating the mark of non-arising is giving rise to prajñā; knowing the false, one does not let it originate. The treatise, following the sūtra, explains 「云何生般若」 tr. "how does prajñā arise": the practitioner contemplates the mark of non-arising of form and all the other dharmas, and this is giving rise to prajñā. It further explains ‘how one contemplates non-arising’: form and the rest originate from the coming together of causes and conditions; the practitioner knows that form is false and does not let it originate; 「不起故不生，不生故不得，不得故不失」 tr. "because it does not originate it does not arise; because it does not arise it is not found; because it is not found it is not lost." Giving rise to prajñā is not cultivating some separate dharma, but seeing through the falseness of dharmas at the very place where they appear, and not originating along with them; the linked ring of the four ‘nots’ is set up from here—this brings the sūtra’s meaning of non-arising down to the point where contemplation and practice take hold.

32. Because it has the mark of non-arising, it joins with nothing—it enters the count of prajñāpāramitā. The treatise explains 「無所合」 tr. "joins with nothing": the intent of Śāriputra’s question is—since prajñā has no place of arising from conditions, with what dharma does it join? Where does it finally abide? What result does it obtain? The answer: because prajñā has the mark of non-arising, it joins with nothing. If prajñā had a dharma it could join with, whether wholesome or unwholesome and so on, it would not be called prajñā; 「今無所合，故入般若波羅蜜數中」 tr. "now, because it joins with nothing, it enters the count of prajñāpāramitā." These words set up a criterion: joining with nothing is not a lack in prajñā, but precisely its qualification for entering the count of prajñā; once it joins with something, it falls into some one class of dharmas, and is no longer the wisdom that illuminates all dharmas.

33. Why Śakra asks only about sarvajñā—his craving is not yet cut off. The treatise sets up a question: Śakra already knows that all dharmas do not join, so why does he ask only about not joining with sarvajñā? The answer: Śakra values and is deeply attached to this prajñā, and 「於薩婆若愛未斷」 tr. "his craving for sarvajñā is not yet cut off," and so he says, ‘does it not join even with sarvajñā?’ The Buddha answers: prajñā and sarvajñā also do not join, because all dharmas are ultimately non-arising. This question and answer lights up a common sickness of learners: coarse realms are easy to relinquish, excellent realms are hard to relinquish; one can empty all dharmas, yet gives rise to craving for omniscience. The treatise-author points straight at the root of his craving, and the Buddha, with the single phrase ‘ultimately non-arising,’ dispels even this last realm of craving.

34. Joining is spoken of to refute annihilation—joining as the Buddha’s mind joins. The treatise explains why the sūtra again speaks of 「合」 tr. "joining": the Buddha speaks of joining in order to refute the wrong view of annihilation; prajñā does not join as ordinary people do, grasping marks, attached to names, joining by conditioned dharmas that originate and act, but 「如佛心合」 tr. "joins as the Buddha’s mind joins." If, hearing ‘joins with nothing,’ one takes prajñā to be cut off from and annihilated with respect to all dharmas, one falls again into an extreme; so the Buddha keeps the one word 「合」 tr. "joining" to guard against the view of annihilation, and at once distinguishes that this joining is not the joining of ordinary people. The one word ‘joining’ blocks annihilation; the words ‘as the Buddha’s mind’ block grasping and attachment—within one sentence both extremes are guarded against.

35. Five meanings explaining joining as the Buddha’s mind joins. The treatise asks: what is joining as the Buddha’s mind joins? It answers with five meanings: because all marks are deceptive, 「不取相」 tr. "it does not grasp at marks"; because in all dharmas there are faults such as impermanence, 「不受」 tr. "it does not receive"; because the mind of self and mine binds and attaches to the world, and the world is all a moving mark, 「不住」 tr. "it does not abide"; because they can give birth to all kinds of suffering and vexation and must afterwards change, 「不著」 tr. "it is not attached"; because all the inverted results of the world are unreal, like an illusion, like a dream, and in reality nothing is extinguished, 「不斷」 tr. "it does not cut off." Therefore the Buddha is not attached to dharmas and does not give rise to a haughty mind; he enters the wholesome mark of ultimate emptiness and enters deeply into great compassion in order to save beings—the bodhisattva should join as the Buddha’s mind joins. Each of the five ‘nots’ answers to one sickness: grasping marks, receiving, abiding and attaching, craving and defilement, annihilation; all five sicknesses are left behind together, and yet great compassion is not set aside—this is exactly the manner in which the Buddha’s mind meets all dharmas.

36. Discriminating with something to be attained loses prajñā; grasping the mark of emptiness also loses it. The treatise, following the sūtra, extends the two faults: Subhūti says that a bodhisattva who, with a mind of something to be attained, discriminates whether omniscience and the rest, and all dharmas, join or do not join, loses prajñā; the Buddha approves his words and speaks one more layer—if one grasps the mark of emptiness ‘all dharmas neither join nor do not join,’ and says that prajñā is empty, without anything existent, not firm, one also loses prajñā. Meanwhile Śakra rejoices and praises it, saying: rare! prajñā does not break or destroy dharmas, because it does not arise, is not found, and is not lost, and yet it can accomplish the bodhisattva and bring him to the Buddha ground. Two faults and one praise stand side by side: discriminating is a fault, and being attached to emptiness is also a fault; not destroying dharmas and yet accomplishing the practitioner—that is the true colour of prajñā.

37. Because the self-nature of form and all the rest is unfindable, they cannot be held in faith. The treatise explains the final question: Subhūti knows that prajñā has the mark of unfindability, and so asks—having faith in prajñā, in what dharma does one have faith? Even the emptiness of prajñā is unfindable; where then does the decided mind place its faith? The Buddha answers: 「色等一切法不可信。何以故？色等一切法自性不可得故不可信。」 tr. "Form and all other dharmas cannot be held in faith. Why? Because the self-nature of form and all other dharmas is unfindable, they cannot be held in faith." The words ‘cannot be held in faith’ must be well understood: they do not mean that dharmas are false and not worth discussing; they mean that when the self-nature of each and every dharma is sought it is unfindable, and so there is not one dharma that can serve as the support of a grasping of faith; one who has faith in prajñā has faith precisely in this unfindability, and so sets up no faith in form or anything up to omniscience of all kinds.

38. Prajñā is called mahāpāramitā—the dispelling of five pairs. The second sūtra passage turns to Subhūti’s praise: prajñā is called mahāpāramitā, the great perfection. The Buddha asks him the reason in return, and Subhūti answers with the dispelling of five pairs: prajñā, toward form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, the twelve sense-fields and the eighteen elements, the six perfections, inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, the dharmas of the buddhas and so on up to the buddhas, 「不作大、不作小」 tr. "does not make great, does not make small"; does not make joined, does not make dispersed; does not make measureless, does not make not measureless; does not make broad, does not make narrow; does not make possessed of power, does not make without power—for these causes and conditions it is called mahāpāramitā. The greatness of the great lies not in being able to make dharmas great, but precisely in making none of the marks of great and small and the rest upon any dharma; because it makes nothing, its measure cannot be limited, and this is mahā.

39. A bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind forming this thought—this is not practising prajñā. Subhūti continues: if a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind does not keep apart from the six perfections, yet gives rise to such a thought—prajñā does not make form great and does not make form small, and so on up to does not make the buddhas possessed of power or without power—if he knows it in this way, 「是為不行般若波羅蜜」 tr. "this is not practising prajñāpāramitā"; because this is not the mark of prajñā: namely, making form great or small, and so on up to the buddhas great or small, possessed of power or without power. The passage just before has said that not making great or small is the meaning of mahā; here it is at once examined: to take 「不作大小」 tr. "not making great or small" again as a thought to hold, the thought itself is already making—to form an understanding where there is no making is to fall right into what was being dispelled.

40. Because of something to be attained there is a great fault—for one with the mark of something to be attained there is no awakening. Subhūti extends the reason: because this bodhisattva uses a mind of something to be attained, 「有大過失」 tr. "there is a great fault"—in practising prajñā he makes form great or small, and so on up to making the buddhas possessed of power or without power. Why is it a great fault? 「有所得相者，無阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "For one with the mark of something to be attained, there is no anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." This sentence is the nail-cutting word of the whole chapter: unsurpassed awakening and the mark of something to be attained cannot coexist; it is not that attaining it is hard, but that the mind of something to be attained is itself contrary to awakening. The fault is called great exactly because what it destroys is not one practice or one good deed, but the very substance of awakening.

41. Ten layers of non-arising—because beings do not arise, prajñā does not arise, and so on up to power not accomplished. Subhūti broadly extends the principle: because beings do not arise, prajñā too should not arise; because form does not arise, prajñā does not arise; and so on up to because the Buddha does not arise, prajñā does not arise; likewise, because the nature of beings, of form, and so on up to of the Buddha is without nature, the nature of prajñā is without nature; because they are not a dharma, it is not a dharma; because empty, empty; because apart, apart; because non-existent, non-existent; because inconceivable, inconceivable; because non-ceasing, non-ceasing; because unknowable, unknowable; because power is not accomplished, power is not accomplished—for these causes and conditions prajñā is called mahāpāramitā. The ten layers share one form: prajñā does not set up a separate nature outside what it illuminates; as the dharmas illuminated are, so is the wisdom that illuminates; the illuminator and the illuminated are dispelled together, and the meaning of greatness is accomplished of itself.

42. The treatise explains—Subhūti’s doubting mind opens and is resolved. The treatise-author sets out how the second sūtra passage came about: Subhūti, hearing what the Buddha said, 「疑心開解」 tr. "his doubting mind opened and was resolved," and praised prajñā, saying: this prajñā is called mahāpāramitā. The Buddha asked him in return: what do you think—why is it called the great pāramitā? Subhūti answered: because it does not make form and the other dharmas great or small. The sūtra passage before had examined its way to ‘having faith in prajñā, one does not have faith in any dharma,’ and the momentum of the words had reached its limit; here Subhūti not only does not doubt, but on the contrary opens out and resolves it into the one praise 「摩訶」 tr. "mahā," which shows that where dispelling reaches its utmost is exactly where the great meaning shines forth—with the words ‘his doubting mind opened and was resolved,’ the treatise-author points out that the praise is the speech of understanding and awakening, not words used to pose a question.

43. The ordinary mind makes great and small at will—contracted in danger, broad in ease; in the eight liberations it follows the mind. The treatise first sets up the opposite side: the mind of ordinary people makes things great and makes things small among dharmas at will. When a person is in danger and pressed, his mind shrinks small; when at peace, secure, rich, and happy, his mind is broad; again, in the eight liberations, because it follows the mind, the outer form contemplated is now large and now small. Of these two examples, one is taken from worldly feeling and one from meditative contemplation, showing exactly that 「大小」 tr. "great and small" lie not in dharmas but in the mind: in the same situation, when the mind is pressed it is small, when the mind is at ease it is great; the same form-dharma, following imagination in contemplation, is now large and now small. Since great and small turn with the mind, one knows they are not the real nature of dharmas.

44. How form is made great and how form is made small. The treatise next brings up the marks of the ordinary person’s grasping of form: within form seen by the eye, even matters that are not form are called form—as when dharmas pointing to action, pointing to measure, pointing to number, pointing to identity and difference, and the like are joined together and taken as form; this is called making form great. Some people call what can be seen form and do not call what cannot be seen form; and again some people say that coarse form is deceptive and not true form, that only the fine particle, being permanent, is true form, and that when fine particles come together they are provisionally named form; this is called making form small. Those who make it great wrongly take in what is not form to widen its domain; those who make it small cut away the provisional name to seek its reality: one expands, one contracts, both alike set up by recollection and imagining, and neither is form’s own proper portion.

45. Following recollection, imagining, and discrimination breaks the nature of dharmas—prajñā contemplates as it really is. The treatise concludes the two passages above: for such causes and conditions, ordinary people make form great or make it small, 「隨憶想分別故，破諸法性」 tr. "following recollection, imagining, and discrimination, they break the nature of dharmas"; prajñāpāramitā contemplates in accord with the nature of form as it really is, and does not make it great or small. The phrase ‘breaks the nature of dharmas’ is very weighty: it is not that the nature of dharmas can be broken, but that recollection, imagining, and discrimination forcibly impose great and small upon dharmas and cover over what dharmas are of themselves, and this is called breaking. The contemplation of prajñā is exactly the opposite—following the original nature of form and contemplating it as it really is, adding not one mark and removing not one mark; the words 「不作」 tr. "does not make" are exactly the meaning of ‘as it really is.’

46. Neither joined nor dispersed—having only a provisional name, without a fixed mark. The treatise explains 「不合不散」 tr. "neither joined nor dispersed": prajñā does not teach that when subtle forms come together some further form arises; 「但有假名，無有定相色」 tr. "there is only a provisional name; there is no form of fixed mark," and therefore there is no joining and no dispersing. It further extends this: form is a made dharma; within prajñā, it is not that coarse form exists because fine particles join, nor that fine particles return because coarse form disperses; dharmas that originate and act have discrimination and reckoning of more and less, and cannot be said to be neither joined nor dispersed. Joining and dispersing are matters of real substances—what has a fixed substance can be gathered and can be dispersed; since form is only a provisional name without a fixed mark, then from the beginning there is nothing that can be joined and nothing that can be dispersed; it is not that it was first joined and is afterwards made not to join.

47. Neither measure nor measureless, neither broad nor narrow, not saying possessed of power or without power. The treatise goes on to explain the remaining pairs: form is boundless and so measureless; because there is no place and no time without form, it has no measure; ordinary people say measureless because of emptiness and say it has measure because of reality, but prajñā is far apart from the two extremes of emptiness and reality, and so says 「非量非無量」 tr. "neither measure nor measureless." Ordinary people obtain their understanding by following the recollections of the mind, and so make form broad or make it narrow; prajñā contemplates the mark of the real dharma and does not follow the mind, and so it is neither broad nor narrow. Ordinary people do not know that dharmas are born from the coming together of causes and conditions, and so say 「色有力」 tr. "form has power"—as when many strands are joined into a rope and they say the rope has power, or a wall collapses and kills a person and they say the wall has power, whereas each, dispersed, has no power; prajñā knows the mark of coming together, and does not say that any one dharma has power, nor does it say it is without power. Therefore it is called 「摩訶般若波羅蜜」 tr. "mahāprajñāpāramitā." The three pairs share one way of judging: ordinary feeling, chasing marks, sets up measure, sets up broad and narrow, sets up power and function; prajñā illuminates that they are provisionally set up by coming together, and makes none of them.

48. There is a further great cause and condition—practising joined together, one is pliant and accomplishes; practising prajñā alone, one is scattered. The treatise turns out the meaning of the gate of practice: if a bodhisattva does not keep apart from the six perfections, he does not make form and the other dharmas great or small; if he practises prajñā alone, 「則心散亂、不調順」 tr. "then his mind is scattered and not tamed and compliant," and many doubts, regrets, and wrong views arise, and he loses the mark of prajñā; if he practises it joined with the five perfections, then he is 「調柔不錯」 tr. "pliant and without error," and can accomplish the many tasks. It is like the eight limbs of the noble path: right view is the path, yet without the seven other limbs to assist it, it cannot accomplish the task, and is not even called right view. Therefore the Buddha says that all wholesome dharmas are born together from the coming together of causes and conditions, and there is not one dharma that arises by itself alone; when they come together each has its power, but the powers are greater and lesser—this is called practising prajñāpāramitā. Wisdom must be upheld by the many practices, just as right view must be assisted by the seven limbs; wisdom alone without practice not only accomplishes nothing, but loses even the substance of wisdom.

49. Falling into the extreme of existence and being attached to the mark of emptiness—both are faults. The treatise extends the faults of practising alone, which are two: if one practises prajñā apart from the five perfections and discriminates form and the other dharmas as great or small, this person falls into using something to be attained and falls within the extreme of existence; if one does not discriminate among dharmas, yet apart from the five perfections is attached to this mark of emptiness, ‘not great, not small,’ and the like—first to discriminate dharmas as great or small, with something to be attained, is a fault; now to be attached to the mark of emptiness, ‘not great, not small,’ and the like, is also a fault. The fault of the extreme of existence is easy to see; the fault of the mark of emptiness is hard to guard against: having relinquished discrimination, one then embraces the mark of non-discrimination—barring the thief at the front gate and welcoming him at the back—and so the treatise-author examines both faults together and does not allow one to stop at either extreme.

50. For one with the mark of something to be attained there is no awakening—the mark of quiescent extinction, the mark of nothing to be attained, the mark of ultimate purity. The treatise explains why both are faults: here Subhūti states the cause and condition—「有所得相者，乃至無阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "For one with the mark of something to be attained, and so on up to: there is no anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." Why? Anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is 「寂滅相、無所得相、畢竟清淨相」 tr. "the mark of quiescent extinction, the mark of nothing to be attained, the mark of ultimate purity"; one with the mark of something to be attained gives rise to all idle discourse and contention; all dharmas neither arise nor cease, and this is the mark of nothing to be attained. The three marks of awakening are a positive definition: because it is quiescent extinction, there is no mark to be grasped; because there is nothing to be attained, there is no mind to hold on; because it is ultimately pure, there is no stain to be mixed in; wherever there is something to be attained, idle discourse and contention will surely arise, running counter to these three marks, and so there is certainly no awakening to be accomplished.

51. Beings do not arise—breaking the inversion of self and mine. The treatise explains the first of the ten layers of non-arising: as with the self and beings, sought throughout the ten directions they are utterly unfindable—「但有假名，實不生」 tr. "there is only a provisional name; in reality they do not arise"; because beings do not arise, prajñā too is like the mark of beings—because it breaks the inversion of self and mine, it neither arises nor ceases; as with form and the other dharmas, because the mark of arising is unfindable, they do not arise. The layer of beings stands first exactly because self and mine are the root of inversion: to cling to a self and to a person on beings who are only provisional names and originally do not arise is the beginning of all idle discourse; prajñā’s being the same as the non-arising of the mark of beings is exactly breaking this inversion at the root.

52. Two dharmas gather in all dharmas—a provisional name without fixed nature is non-arising. The treatise sets up the general gathering: two dharmas gather in all dharmas—beings and dharmas. These two dharmas are born from the coming together of causes and conditions, 「但有假名，無有定性」 tr. "having only a provisional name, without any fixed nature"; if a dharma is without fixed nature, this dharma is non-arising; because these two dharmas are non-arising, one should know that form and all the other dharmas are also non-arising. Beings and dharmas take in the entire domain of the two graspings, of person and of dharma; both are provisional names upon the coming together of causes and conditions, both are without fixed nature, and so both return to non-arising. It further concludes: beings’ and dharmas’ being without nature, without anything existent, empty, apart, inconceivable, non-ceasing, and unknowable are all so by the same standard—the one 「無定性」 tr. "without fixed nature" runs through all ten layers.

53. Power not accomplished—because prajñā is born from dharmas, it too is ultimately empty. The treatise explains the last layer, 「力不成就」 tr. "power not accomplished": first it says that all dharmas are born from the coming together of causes and conditions and each has no power of its own; prajñā knows that dharmas each have no power of their own and so have no self-nature, and having no self-nature they are empty. Going one layer further: 「般若波羅蜜從諸法生故無自力」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is born from dharmas and so has no power of its own"; having no power of its own, it too is ultimately empty like all dharmas. These words go to the very bottom: not only are the dharmas contemplated without power and without nature, but the prajñā that contemplates is also set up from the causes and conditions of dharmas, equally without power of its own, equally ultimately empty—only when the wisdom that illuminates does not place itself outside the emptiness it illuminates is illumination at its utmost.

54. Question and answer five—lest one say prajñā has great power, it blocks again. The treatise sets up the last question: it has already been said that form and the other dharmas are not made possessed of power and not made without power; why now say further that because the power of beings, form, and the rest is not accomplished, the power of prajñā too is not accomplished? The answer: above it was said that prajñā contemplates dharmas without making them possessed of power or without power, and the hearer will say, ‘prajñā can make this contemplation, and so it has great power’; therefore here it says that because the power of beings, form, and the rest is not accomplished, the power of prajñā too is not accomplished. The former sentence blocks the power of what is contemplated; the hearer turns instead to honour the power of what contemplates, and so it must be blocked again: even the prajñā that ‘can make this contemplation’ has no power of its own to rely on. Only when the blocking reaches the one who contemplates is the blocking complete.

55. Returning to the conclusion—for such various causes and conditions it is called mahāpāramitā. The treatise gathers up the whole chapter: for such various causes and conditions it is called 「摩訶波羅蜜」 tr. "mahāpāramitā." Here the meaning of mahā is complete: to make none of great and small, joined and dispersed, measure, breadth, and power upon dharmas is the greatness that blocks feeling; the ten layers of non-arising, the illuminator and the illuminated equally empty, is the greatness of substance; practising joined with the five perfections, pliant and accomplishing, is the greatness of practice; for one with the mark of something to be attained there is no awakening—this is the judgement on the fruit. Under one name the three layers of question of the whole chapter are all gathered in—the illumination of ‘Illumination’ is this great wisdom that makes nothing, attains nothing, and yet has nothing it does not accomplish.

Do Not Misread

Do not read the illumination in 「能照一切法」 tr. "can illuminate all dharmas" as there being a body of light that can illuminate, shining on the ten thousand things. The sūtra itself notes it clearly—it can illuminate 「畢竟淨故」 tr. "because it is ultimately pure": the pervasiveness of its illumination comes from the purity of its substance, as a mirror without stain has nothing it does not show; it is not that prajñā separately possesses a power of illumination that it bestows on dharmas. The treatise’s explanation is the same: within the real mark there is no stain or turbidity of idle discourse, and so it is called ultimately pure, and so it can illuminate all five kinds of Dharma treasury. If one sets up a substance that can illuminate, that is seeking a fixed mark in the signless dharma—exactly a replay of the road the treatise rebukes, 「心未淳熟、求其定相不能得，便生慢心」 tr. "the mind not yet ripened, seeking its fixed mark and unable to find it, one then gives rise to a proud mind"; illumination is the function of purity, not a capacity outside the substance.

Do not read 「世尊即是般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the World-Honored One is prajñāpāramitā" as the Buddha being equated with a scroll of the sūtra, and do not on that account mistake offering to be a matter only of attending to ritual objects. The sūtra’s meaning is: prajñā, cultivated and gathered, turns into omniscience; the Buddha is accomplished by prajñā, and when the Dharma is accomplished that is the Buddha, and so revering prajñā should be as revering the Buddha; the treatise-author further points out that this answer is a remedy for the worldly feeling that is 「深著眾生相、於貴法情薄」 tr. "deeply attached to the mark of beings, and thin in feeling toward the precious Dharma." If one reads it as the scroll of the sūtra being the Buddha’s body and stops at offering ritual objects, one gets the matter and loses its meaning; if one reads it as needing no reverence, one loses the matter as well—know that the word ‘is’ teaches one precisely, within the rite of reverence, to recognise that by which the Buddha is the Buddha.

Do not read ‘having faith in prajñā, one does not have faith in form and so on up to omniscience of all kinds’ as wiping out dharmas and throwing away the noble fruits. The reason for not having faith the sūtra states most clearly—「不可得故」 tr. "because they are unfindable": the self-nature of each and every dharma, when sought, is unfindable, and so one does not set up a grasping of faith upon it; it does not mean that form and the rest are utterly non-existent or that the noble fruits are set up in vain. In the same way, 「無所合」 tr. "joins with nothing" is not being cut off, and so the Buddha at once guards against the view of annihilation with 「如佛心合」 tr. "joins as the Buddha’s mind joins"; and both the thought of joining or not joining and the thought 「空虛不堅固」 tr. "empty and hollow, not firm" are seen through. What this whole series of blockings and dispellings blocks is the mind that grasps marks, not the dharmas that are blocked; if one reads the words of blocking as annihilation, one falls right into the wrong view of annihilation that the Buddha refutes in the treatise.

Do not read ‘prajñā alone is honoured’ and 「和合行」 tr. "practising joined together" as contradicting each other, nor read practising prajñā alone as the purer the higher. In this chapter the two sides stand together: on one side, the simile of the men blind from birth and the similes of the mineral powder and the general establish prajñā’s sole honour—the five perfections apart from prajñā are like the blind without a guide, and because prajñā’s power is great the five dharmas obtain their name; on the other side, the end of the treatise states plainly that practising prajñā alone, apart from the five perfections, leaves the mind scattered, with many doubts, regrets, and wrong views, losing the mark of prajñā, and that only by practising it joined with the five perfections is one pliant and able to accomplish. Sole honour is spoken with respect to the work of guiding and the force of power; joining together is spoken with respect to accomplishment; just as the general’s power is great and the victory goes to him, which does not mean the general can fight alone without an army. To read either side one-sidedly is to lose the wholeness of this chapter’s gate of practice.

Bearing on Practice

The first benefit this chapter gives to one who applies himself is to set ‘reverence for the Dharma’ at its utmost. Prajñā is signless, and is most easily slighted by a mind that seeks marks—seeing no auspicious responses and touching no special states, one suspects it is not worth valuing; with the sixteen phrases praising its virtues and the answer 「當如供養世尊」 tr. "as one makes offerings to the World-Honored One," this chapter teaches one to give rise, toward the signless dharma, to a reverence as though before the Buddha. In daily life, when reading, reciting, and reflecting on prajñā, first gather up the slighting and scattered mind and hold the thought of making offerings to the World-Honored One; this is not merely adding ritual observances, but using a reverent mind to remedy the pride that seeks marks—only when reverence goes deep does one have faith that the Dharma and the Buddha are not two.

The second benefit lies in where to take hold of the one question 「云何生般若」 tr. "how does prajñā arise." The sūtra answers: because form and the rest do not arise, prajñā arises; the treatise brings it down to contemplation and practice—form and the rest originate from the coming together of causes and conditions; the practitioner knows them to be false and does not let them originate; not originating, they do not arise; not arising, they are not found; not found, they are not lost. One who applies himself need not look for prajñā in some remote and far-off place: right where the objects of daily life appear, see through their coming together from causes and conditions, utterly without fixed reality, and do not originate along with them in aversion, love, grasping, and attachment—the place where this one thought does not originate along with them is the place where prajñā arises. One should also keep in mind the judgement of 「無所合」 tr. "joins with nothing": the illumination of wisdom is not tied to any one side, good or evil, with outflows or without outflows; to be tied to one side is not prajñā.

The third benefit is guarding against two subtle faults. To form the thought of ‘joining or not joining’ is a fault; to form the thought ‘prajñā is empty and without anything existent’ is also a fault; to discriminate dharmas as great or small is to fall into the extreme of existence, and to be attached to the mark of emptiness ‘not great, not small’ is also a fault. One who applies himself, at the point where the contemplation of emptiness begins to gain strength, most easily grasps emptiness again as something attained—this chapter sees through this barrier again and again, and the one sentence 「有所得相者，無阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "for one with the mark of something to be attained, there is no anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi" should be taken as a motto kept at one’s side: examine one’s own mind, and wherever there is a single mark to lean on or a single attainment to rely on, know that one has already left prajñā, and put it down at once.

The fourth benefit is the balance of the gate of practice. The end of the treatise gives a clear instruction: practising prajñā alone, the mind is scattered and many doubts, regrets, and wrong views arise; practising it joined with the five perfections, one is pliant and without error and can accomplish the many tasks, as right view must be assisted by the seven limbs. One who applies himself must not rely on understanding and wisdom and set aside the practices of giving, keeping the precepts, patience, vigour, and meditation—the practices are like hands and feet, wisdom is like the eyes, and with eyes but no feet one cannot reach the city; all wholesome dharmas are born together from the coming together of causes and conditions, and there is not one dharma that arises by itself alone. To guide practice with wisdom and to nourish wisdom with practice—this is the practising of prajñāpāramitā that this chapter confirms.

Further Resonances

The backbone of this chapter is a threefold meaning strung together by the one name 「照明」 tr. "Illumination": first comes the praise of virtues—Śāriputra praises prajñā with sixteen phrases on its virtues, that it can illuminate all dharmas and is ultimately pure, gathered into the answer on offering, 「世尊即是般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the World-Honored One is prajñāpāramitā," and with the simile of the men blind from birth and the similes of the mineral powder and the general establishes prajñā’s position as guide and sole honoured one among the five perfections; next comes examination and discernment—how prajñā arises (it arises because form and the rest do not arise; not originating, not arising, not found, not lost), how it joins (it joins with nothing, does not join even with sarvajñā, and joining as not grasping, not receiving, not abiding, not attached, not cutting off, it also joins with nothing), and the seeing through of the two faults, the thought of joining or not joining and the thought that grasps the mark of emptiness, returning to ‘having faith in prajñā, one does not have faith in form and the rest, because they are unfindable’; last comes the setting up of the name—prajñā makes none of great and small, joined and dispersed, measure, breadth, and power upon dharmas, with ten layers of non-arising and the illuminator and the illuminated equally empty, and so it is called mahāpāramitā; and with 「有所得相者無阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "for one with the mark of something to be attained there is no anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi" its boundary is settled, and with practising joined with the five perfections its practice is gathered in. The treatise’s explanation, in its passages on ultimate purity illuminating all five treasuries, the vajra samādhi and the knowledge of general and particular marks, the five meanings of joining as the Buddha’s mind joins, ordinary people making great and small by recollection and imagining, two dharmas gathering in all dharmas, and prajñā’s being ultimately empty too because it is born from dharmas, lays the foundation for the sūtra’s meaning one piece at a time.

The two meanings ‘prajñā guides the five perfections so that they obtain the name pāramitā’ and 「摩訶波羅蜜」 tr. "mahāpāramitā" especially let one see how the vein of meaning carries on through the preceding and following chapters. The previous chapter, on rejoicing and dedication, gathered the roots of goodness of the three times by the power of skilful means without destroying the real mark; this chapter at its opening has Śāriputra make clear that this matter depends entirely on the guarding of prajñā—a drawing in of the meaning of rejoicing toward the meaning of prajñā; and the meaning that the five perfections obtain their name through prajñā carries on in a single line from the meaning of prajñā as honoured guide spoken of repeatedly in the preceding chapters, and in this chapter, with the three similes of the blind men, the mineral powder, and the general, it is spoken of most aptly. Once the meaning of mahā is established, the 「大」 tr. "greatness" of prajñā has been fully spoken from the side of dispelling; the chapters that follow further unfold and bring it to light through the gates of faith and disparagement and of praising purity; the reader may view the preceding and following chapters together, to see the single continuous vein of prajñā passing from the praise of its virtues, through examination and discernment, to the setting up of its name (the carrying-on of the chapters and the examination of their variant names are detailed in the Apparatus).

Overview

At the opening of "Faith and Slander," what Śāriputra asks about is not the Dharma but the person: 「有菩薩摩訶薩，信解是般若波羅蜜者，從何處終，來生是間？」 tr. "There are bodhisattva-mahāsattvas who have faith in and understand this prajñāpāramitā—dying in what place do they come to be born here?" How long since they aroused the mind? To how many buddhas have they made offerings? How long have they practised the six perfections, so that they 「能隨順解深般若波羅蜜義」 tr. "can understand the meaning of deep prajñāpāramitā in accordance with it"? The Buddha answers: this bodhisattva has made offerings to the buddhas of the ten directions and comes to be born here; it is immeasurable and boundless asaṃkhyeya hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭi of kalpas since he aroused the mind, and from his first arousing of the mind he has constantly practised the six perfections—this bodhisattva, whether he sees or hears prajñāpāramitā, has this thought: 「我見佛，從佛聞法。」 tr. "I see the Buddha; from the Buddha I hear the Dharma." He can understand the meaning of deep prajñā in accordance with it, 「以無相、無二、無所得故」 tr. "because of the signless, the non-dual, and nothing to be attained". With this one question, the provenance of the one who has faith in and understands prajñā stands established: this is not a chance root of goodness, but the fruit of merit and wisdom thickly accumulated over distant kalpas. Yet the weight of the whole chapter then turns at once to the reverse of this question—why is it that people who have likewise long aroused the intent and made offerings to many buddhas, on hearing deep prajñā, 「便從眾中起去」 tr. "then rise from the assembly and leave"? What karma do those who disparage prajñā give rise to, and what result do they receive? The chapter is named "Faith and Slander," and its eye lies precisely in raising faith and slander together, set face to face: whence those who have faith come is as that; whither those who slander go is as this; and what separates faith from slander is not how much of the Dharma one has heard, nor how thick or thin one's cultivation of merit, but the single mind of having something to be attained or having nothing to be attained. The severity of this chapter lies in the Buddha's not shrinking from saying all there is to say of the sin of slandering the Dharma—one who disparages prajñā disparages the omniscience and the omniscience of all kinds of the buddhas of the past, the future, and the present, 「是人毀呰三世諸佛一切智，起破法業」 tr. "this person disparages the omniscience of the buddhas of the three times and gives rise to the karma of breaking the Dharma", falls into the great hells, and passes through all the ten directions; the compassion of this chapter lies in this, that after all has been said, it still closes with 「足為未來世作明誡」 tr. "which is enough to serve as a bright warning for the future age", so that people of later ages, hearing it, may know fear, and fearing, may know to stop.

The First Part sets the provenance of those who have faith and the destination of those who slander against each other and says all there is to say of them. Sūtra round ① first establishes the one who has faith and understanding: he has come after making offerings to the buddhas of the ten directions; seeing the scroll is like seeing the Buddha, and opening the scroll to search out its meaning is like hearing from the Buddha. Subhūti follows the track of ‘seeing and hearing’ and asks: can prajñā be heard and seen? The Buddha answers: 「無有聞者、無有見者」 tr. "there is no hearer and there is no seer"; it is unheard and unseen, 「諸法鈍故」 tr. "because dharmas are dull"—the six perfections, the eighteen emptinesses, the thirty-seven limbs of the path, and so on up to the Buddha and the Buddha's path, are all unheard and unseen. He further distinguishes the people who can practise deep prajñā: from the first arousing of intent, by the power of skilful means, they destroy nothing among all dharmas; they never depart from the six perfections, never depart from the buddhas, and so on up to bringing beings to maturity and purifying buddha-worlds. Then at once the reverse side is turned out: there are bodhisattvas who have seen many buddhas and long practised the six perfections, 「皆以有所得故」 tr. "all because of having something to be attained", and who, hearing deep prajñā expounded, rise from the assembly and leave—in a former life they abandoned it, and in this life too they abandon it, sowing the karma of the causes and conditions of delusion, which grows and grows until it reaches disparagement; to disparage prajñā is to disparage the omniscience of the buddhas of the three times, giving rise to the karma of breaking the Dharma, and for immeasurable hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭi of years one falls into the great hells, 「從一大地獄至一大地獄」 tr. "from one great hell to another great hell"; when the fire-kalpa arises one is moved to another region, and, the sin not yet exhausted, one comes back here again; when the hells are done one passes into the animal realm; as the heavy sin gradually thins one may obtain a human body, born into a family of the blind, a family of caṇḍālas, or all manner of low and base families that clear latrines and carry corpses, 「若無眼、若一眼、若眼瞎，若無舌、無耳、無手」 tr. "either without eyes, or with one eye, or with eyes gone blind; either without a tongue, without ears, without hands", and born in places where there is no Buddha, no Dharma, and no disciples of the Buddha. Śāriputra asks: is the sin of the five heinous sins like breaking the Dharma? The Buddha answers: 「不應言相似。」 tr. "It should not be said that they are alike." The one who slanders prajñā disparages it himself and also teaches others to disparage it, ruins his own person and also ruins the persons of others, 「自飲毒殺身，亦飲他人毒」 tr. "drinks poison himself and kills his own body, and also makes others drink poison"—such a person the Buddha does not permit even to be heard of by name, let alone to be seen with the eyes: 「當知是人名為污法人，為墮衰濁黑性」 tr. "know that this person is called one who defiles the Dharma, one who has fallen into a nature of decline, turbidity, and blackness". Śāriputra further asks the size of the body that the breaker of the Dharma receives, and the Buddha is unwilling to tell—fearing that those with faith, hearing it, would be greatly grieved and frightened, 「憂怖故風發，吐熱血死」 tr. "and because of grief and fright the winds would stir, and they would vomit hot blood and die", and that those without faith would receive heavy sin in later lives. Śāriputra asks him to speak for the sake of the future age, and the Buddha consents, so that hearing of long and distant suffering 「足為未來世作明誡」 tr. "is enough to serve as a bright warning for the future age"; Śāriputra then declares that pure and good men and good women, hearing this Dharma, have enough to rely on: 「寧失身命，終不破法」 tr. "they would rather lose body and life than ever break the Dharma". Treatise round ① explains it section by section: it explains the intent of Śāriputra's asking about provenance (one who is not yet a noble one and yet can know the Dharma of the noble ones must be a person of great virtue); it explains understanding the meaning of deep prajñā in accordance with it—「不取相、不著空，行空行，和合五波羅蜜行般若波羅蜜」 tr. "not grasping at marks, not attached to emptiness, practising the practice of emptiness, bringing together the five perfections to practise prajñāpāramitā", using a mind of great kindness and compassion for the sake of all beings; it explains unheard and unseen—all dharmas, entering prajñā, are all of one mark, the signless, 「如百川歸海，皆為一味」 tr. "as the hundred rivers return to the sea and all become one taste"; it explains why, the two marks of the visible and the invisible having been spoken of, the question about practising by skilful means is asked further; it explains the chain of causes and conditions of the karma of slandering the Dharma—in a former life not having faith and not receiving it, giving rise to the karma of delusion; doubt, regret, evil, and wrongness, and the attached mind growing and growing; disparaging and destroying it in the midst of the great assembly, breaking the omniscience of the buddhas of the three times and the ten directions, and on turning over the body falling into the great hells; it explains that the great hells are Avīci, and explains the aspect of going from one great hell to another great hell; it explains why the results in low and base families are so—because he did not wish to see prajñā he is born blind; because he despised those who expound the Dharma he is without a tongue; because he did not wish to hear it he is without ears; 「麾手非撥故無手」 tr. "because he waved his hand to reject it and brush it away, he is without hands"; it explains why the five heinous sins are not alike—drawing blood from the Buddha's body and killing an arhat 「但壞肉身，不壞法身」 tr. "only destroy the fleshly body; they do not destroy the Dharma body", and destroying the Saṅgha is separating a retinue and does not destroy prajñā, whereas 「般若波羅蜜能令人作佛，毀般若罪則無喻」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā can make people buddhas; the sin of disparaging prajñā has no comparison"; it also sets a comparison against this: the kindness of parents in caring for a child extends at most through one life, and 「無能以一眼與者」 tr. "none can give him even one eye", while the bodhisattva who practises prajñā, through boundless kalpas, 「以頭、目、髓、腦，積過須彌，以施眾生」 tr. "gives heads, eyes, marrow, and brains, piled higher than Sumeru, to beings"—how could the sin of destroying such a Dharma be like the five heinous sins? Lastly it explains the nature of decline, turbidity, and blackness: like a person struck by decline, whose wealth dwindles day by day; 「如濁水泥，不見面像，亦不中飲」 tr. "like turbid, muddy water, in which one cannot see the image of one's face, and which is not fit to drink"; in the Buddha's Dharma 「善法名白，不善法名黑」 tr. "wholesome dharmas are called white, unwholesome dharmas are called black", and because one constantly accumulates unwholesome dharmas, one comes to have an unwholesome nature.

The Last Part, in three rounds, first exhausts the causes of slander, next establishes the domain of faith, and finally returns to ultimate purity. Sūtra round ②, through Subhūti, turns to the root of karma: good men and good women should well restrain the karma of body, speech, and mind; he asks whether it is only through accumulating the karma of speech that there is this heavy sin of breaking the Dharma, and the Buddha answers that it is so—these deluded people go forth in the Buddha's Dharma and receive the precepts, yet break deep prajñā, disparaging it and not receiving it; to break prajñā is to break the omniscience of the buddhas of the ten directions; to break omniscience is to break the Buddha Jewel; because the Buddha Jewel is broken, the Dharma Jewel is broken; because the Dharma Jewel is broken, the Saṅgha Jewel is broken; because the Three Jewels are broken, the right view of the world is broken, and so on to breaking the four foundations of mindfulness and the dharma of omniscience of all kinds, incurring immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya sin. He asks further how many causes and conditions there are for disparaging and destroying it, and the Buddha answers with four causes and conditions: 「為魔所使」 tr. "being driven by Māra"; 「不信深法，不信不解，心不得清淨」 tr. "not having faith in the deep Dharma, not having faith and not understanding, the mind not attaining purity"; 「與惡知識相隨，心沒懈怠，堅著五受眾」 tr. "following along with evil friends, the mind sunk in indolence, firmly attached to the five aggregates of clinging"; 「多行瞋恚，自高輕人」 tr. "much practising anger and hatred, exalting oneself and despising others". Treatise round ② explains: it is the karma of speech that breaks the Dharma, so why speak of restraining the karma of body, speech, and mind? 「意業是口業之本」 tr. "The karma of mind is the root of the karma of speech"; because the karma of mind is restrained, the karma of body and speech is also wholesome. This person has no pressing business of his own and also nothing to gain, and yet by his own tongue makes sin: 「是為大狂」 tr. "this is great madness". This madman will in a future age go forth in the Buddha's Dharma—the śrāvakas attached to the śrāvaka Dharma: 「佛法過五百歲後，各各分別有五部」 tr. "after the Buddha's Dharma has passed five hundred years, each makes its own distinctions and there are five schools"; each clings to its own Dharma, firmly attached to words and speech, and hearing it said that prajñā and all dharmas are ultimately empty, it is 「如刀傷心」 tr. "as if a knife had wounded the heart", and all of them say: 「決定之法，今云何言無？」 tr. "Settled dharmas—how can one now say they do not exist?" First doubt arises; later wrong view arises toward the Dharma of emptiness; and because wrong view gains strength, they disparage and destroy prajñā in the midst of the great assembly. It also explains the four causes and conditions at length, citing the incident in which Māra entered Ānanda's body and three times he did not answer the Buddha, and makes clear that Māra is of four kinds, and that those of sharp faculties who follow evil teachers, those whose fetters are thick and who give rise to indolence, and those with much anger, hatred, and arrogance, are each a cause of slander. Sūtra round ③ turns back to the difficulty of faith: Subhūti says to the Buddha that this prajñā, for 「不勤精進、種不善根、惡友相得人，難信難解」 tr. "people who are not diligent and vigorous, who plant roots that are not good, and who keep company with evil companions, is hard to have faith in and hard to understand", and the Buddha assents to his words; he asks how it is so deep and hard to have faith in and to understand, and the Buddha answers: form, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds, are all 「不縛不解」 tr. "neither bound nor released"—why? because of 「無所有性」 tr. "a nature without anything existent"; the original limit, the later limit, and the present, the three limits, are likewise all neither bound nor released. Subhūti further lists seven features of the people for whom faith is hard, and the Buddha assents and adds 「繫屬於魔」 tr. "bound over to Māra"; then the Buddha himself speaks the gate of purity: form is pure and its result too is pure; 「色淨故即般若波羅蜜淨，般若波羅蜜淨即色淨」 tr. "because form is pure, prajñāpāramitā is pure; prajñāpāramitā being pure is form being pure", and so on up to omniscience of all kinds, 「無二無別、無斷無壞」 tr. "without duality and without difference, without cutting and without breaking"; because non-duality is pure, form is pure; because the self is pure, beings are pure, and so on up to the knower and the seer being pure, form is pure. Treatise round ③ explains: 「與上相違，名為信般若波羅蜜」 tr. "What is contrary to the above is called having faith in prajñāpāramitā"—the reverse of what is hard to have faith in is precisely the domain of faith. It explains neither bound nor released: the three poisons are bondage, the three gates of liberation are release; the three poisons are deceptive and unreal, arise from the coming together of causes and conditions, and have no self-nature, and so there is no bondage; without bondage there is no release; because the three poisons are broken, the three gates of liberation too are empty; if the dharmas of bondage really had self-nature they could not be released, 「若破，即墮斷滅中」 tr. "and if they were broken, one would fall into annihilation"; all mind and mental-factor dharmas, with recollection, imagining, and discrimination and grasping at marks, are all bound within their objects; entering the real mark of all dharmas, one knows them all to be deceptive: 「是縛空故，解亦空」 tr. "because this bondage is empty, release too is empty". It also makes clear that Subhūti knows prajñā is neither very deep nor not very deep—as is said in a later chapter: 「若謂般若波羅蜜甚深，則遠離般若波羅蜜」 tr. "if one says that prajñāpāramitā is very deep, one is then far removed from prajñāpāramitā"—and therefore he says that it is evil people who take prajñā to be very deep and hard to understand, not meaning good people; it explains the seven features of evil people one by one; it explains why, because the result is pure, the cause is pure—the four foundations of mindfulness are the result of form and the other dharmas; the contemplation of impurity is a gate of first entry, not a real contemplation; within prajñā all contemplations cease and idle discourse ceases, and this is the real mark of form; prajñā is like space, ultimately pure, and has three kinds of causes and conditions: 「正觀、正行、正修」 tr. "right contemplation, right practice, right cultivation"; lastly it explains that self and dharmas have only provisional names—just as the self is empty, without anything existent, and pure, so too are all dharmas. Sūtra round ④ pushes the gate of purity out to the whole Dharma-realm: because lust is pure, form is pure, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds being pure; so too with anger and delusion being pure, 「不二不別」 tr. "not two and not different"; 「無明淨故諸行淨，諸行淨故識淨」 tr. "because ignorance is pure, the constructions are pure; because the constructions are pure, consciousness is pure", the twelve links of dependent arising pure link by link in turn, and so on to: because prajñā is pure, giving and the other perfections are pure, the eighteen emptinesses are pure, and the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to omniscience of all kinds are pure; because the conditioned is pure, the unconditioned is pure; because the past is pure, the future and the present are pure, the three times pure through one another, 「不二不別、無斷無壞」 tr. "not two and not different, without cutting and without breaking". Treatise round ④ explains: the Buddha said that the three poisons are filth and impurity, so how is it said here that because lust and the like are pure, form and the like are also pure? 「三毒實性清淨故，色等諸法亦清淨」 tr. "Because the real nature of the three poisons is pure, form and the other dharmas are also pure"; ignorance being pure means that ignorance is ultimately empty; because the eighteen emptinesses are used, form and so on up to omniscience of all kinds are empty, and what is empty is precisely pure: 「一法為首，餘法各各為首，展轉皆清淨」 tr. "one dharma taking the lead, and each of the remaining dharmas taking the lead in turn, all are pure through one another"; 「有為法實相即是無為法」 tr. "the real mark of conditioned dharmas is precisely the unconditioned dharma"; permanence, pleasure, self, and purity are sought and are unfindable, and truly to know them as unfindable is precisely the unconditioned dharma; the three times are traced to emptiness one by one, 「三世空故，有為法空」 tr. "because the three times are empty, conditioned dharmas are empty"; because conditioned dharmas are empty, the unconditioned dharma is empty; 「空即是畢竟清淨，不破不壞，無戲論，如虛空」 tr. "emptiness is precisely ultimate purity, unbroken and undestroyed, without idle discourse, like space". Here the whole chapter is gathered to its conclusion: thus prajñāpāramitā is ultimately pure, 「三世諸佛法藏」 tr. "the Dharma treasury of the buddhas of the three times", and one who breaks the spoken words and written letters that can proclaim and show the real-mark prajñā therefore falls into the hells. A final question gathers up all the remaining doubt: can people of the five heinous sins and of broken precepts who have faith in prajñā become buddhas or not? And how is it that those who uphold the precepts and are vigorous but do not have faith in prajñā fall into the hells? The answer: 「破般若有二種」 tr. "breaking prajñā is of two kinds"—foolish people slander it, saying 「非是佛說」 tr. "it is not spoken by the Buddha", that it is 「莊嚴口力者說」 tr. "spoken by one with the power of an ornamented tongue", or saying 「雖是佛說，其中處處餘人增益」 tr. "although it is spoken by the Buddha, here and there within it others have added to it"—those of this first kind of breaking fall into the great hells; there are people who expound prajñā with an attached mind, discriminating and grasping at marks, 「口說空法而心著有」 tr. "speaking the Dharma of emptiness with the mouth while the mind is attached to existence"—these who debate with an attached mind are not called breakers—just as 「調達出佛身血，祇域亦出佛身血」 tr. "Devadatta drew blood from the Buddha's body, and Jīvaka also drew blood from the Buddha's body"; just as 「如畫作佛像，一人以像不好故破，一人以惡心故破」 tr. "as when an image of the Buddha is painted, one person breaks it because the image is not good, and another person breaks it out of an evil mind"; 「以心不同故，一人得福，一人得罪」 tr. "because their minds are not the same, one person gains merit and one person gains sin". Faith too is of two kinds: 「一者、知般若實義信，得如說果報；二者、信經卷言語文字，得功德少。」 tr. "First, faith that knows the real meaning of prajñā, which obtains the result as it is spoken; second, faith in the words, speech, and letters of the scroll, which obtains little merit." The sin of wrong view is heavy, as in the Buddha's simile, 「如種苦種，雖復四大所成，皆作苦味」 tr. "like planting a bitter seed: although it too is formed of the four great elements, it all turns to a bitter taste"; a person of wrong view, though he uphold the precepts and be vigorous, turns it all into evil dharmas; people of the five heinous sins have evil sin covering the mind and find it hard to have faith in deep prajñā, yet if they meet a good friend their road is not cut off—「如阿闍世王殺父之罪，蒙佛、文殊師利善知識故，除其重罪」 tr. "as with King Ajātaśatru's sin of killing his father: through the Buddha and Mañjuśrī as his good friends, his heavy sin was removed", and he obtained the result of prajñā as it is spoken, 「受無上道記」 tr. "receiving the prediction of the unsurpassed path".

For the whole chapter the sūtra text and the treatise's explanation each come in four rounds, sūtra and treatise advancing in alternation, spanning the two fascicles sixty-two and sixty-three; following the fascicle boundary the chapter is divided into two arcs, the First Part and the Last Part, and the Last Part carries at the head of its fascicle the continuing title 「之餘」 tr. "the remainder". The First Part takes in the first round of sūtra and treatise—the provenance of the one with faith and understanding, the meaning of unheard and unseen, the causes, conditions, and results of the karma of slandering the Dharma, the verdict that the five heinous sins are not alike, the compassion of the Buddha's not telling the size of the body received, and the vow 「寧失身命，終不破法」 tr. "rather lose body and life than ever break the Dharma"; the Last Part takes in the latter three rounds—the thorough questioning of the karma of speech and the four causes and conditions, neither bound nor released and the seven features of those for whom faith is hard, the gate in which the purity of form and the purity of prajñā are identical with each other, the chain of the twelve links of dependent arising and of the three times ultimately pure, the verdict on the two kinds of breaking and the two kinds of faith, and the simile of the bitter seed together with King Ajātaśatru's prediction. What the First Part lays out is the two poles set face to face, ‘whence those with faith come, whither those who slander go’; what the Last Part lays out is the tracing to the root, ‘from where slander arises, on what faith is established’; and at last, within ultimate purity, it speaks the boundary between faith and slander to the point where nothing more can be said.

Therefore, in reading each round of question and answer, one can ask at least three layers of questions. First, what are the two ends of this round's facing-off—is it the one with faith and understanding who has come after making offerings to the buddhas of the ten directions, against the one who abandons it and, on hearing deep prajñā, 「便從眾中起去」 tr. "then rises from the assembly and leaves"? Is it the one who relies on it, 「寧失身命，終不破法」 tr. "rather losing body and life than ever breaking the Dharma", against the one who grasps at marks, 「口說空法而心著有」 tr. "speaking the Dharma of emptiness with the mouth while the mind is attached to existence"? Second, where does the judgment of sin and merit fall—not in the traces of body and speech but in the mind: 「意業是口業之本」 tr. "the karma of mind is the root of the karma of speech"; the same drawing of blood from the Buddha's body, and yet 「一人得罪，一人得福」 tr. "one person gains sin, one person gains merit"; the same breaking of an image, and yet merit and sin each differ—the criterion always lies in the attached mind and the mind without attachment. Third, with sin spoken of so severely, where does it all return—the Buddha's unwillingness to tell the size of the body received is compassion, and his consenting to tell of long suffering as a bright warning is also compassion; slander arises from wrong view, wrong view arises from grasping at marks, and grasping at marks arises from the clinging of 「決定之法，今云何言無」 tr. "settled dharmas—how can one now say they do not exist"—and yet the whole chapter does not in the end close in fear, but closes in form being pure because lust, anger, and delusion are pure, in the three times being pure, in ultimate purity: what slander disparages can from the first not be disparaged, and what faith has faith in is from the first pure of itself. Read on along these four rounds of dialogue, and one will come at last to the same place: faith in prajñā is not faith in a scroll of scripture, it is faith in the ultimate purity of the real mark of all dharmas; slander of prajñā is not slander of a scroll of scripture, it is smearing oneself with the poison of wrong view and losing the Dharma treasury of the buddhas of the three times—therefore, rather lose body and life than ever break the Dharma.

Reading On in the Order of the Treatise

Faith and Slander, First Part: Where One Who Has Faith in and Understands Prajñā Comes From; Prajñā Is Unheard and Unseen; the Heavy Sin of Breaking the Dharma in Disparaging and Slandering Prajñā

What Is Being Asked

As this unit opens, what Śāriputra asks is a question about a 「人」 tr. "person": the bodhisattva who can have faith in and understand this deep prajñā—what, in the end, is his background? Dying in what place does he come to be born here? How long ago did he arouse the mind? To how many buddhas has he made offerings? Beneath this question lies wonder: prajñā is deep and subtle, hard even to hear, how much more to practise; one who can have faith in and understand it is surely no ordinary person. The Buddha’s answer gives this person’s background great weight—he has made offerings to the buddhas of the ten directions, aroused the mind immeasurable asaṃkhyeya kalpas ago, and from his first arousing of the mind has constantly practised the six perfections—faith in and understanding of prajñā is not a moment’s cleverness but the fruit of provisions gathered over a long time. Then Subhūti asks from the other end: can this prajñā be heard, can it be seen? The Buddha answers that it is unheard and unseen, 「諸法鈍故」 tr. "because dharmas are dull". And so this unit sets up two lines, one positive and one negative: on the positive side, what kind of person can practise deep prajñā—one who has first aroused intent and has the power of skilful means; on the negative side, what kind of person disparages and slanders prajñā—one who has long practised the six perfections but always with a mind of something to be attained, who abandoned it in a former life and abandons it again in this life, sowing the karma of delusion over and over, until at last he disparages prajñā, gives rise to the karma of breaking the Dharma, falls into the great hells, passes on through the ten directions, and when the sin has thinned and he obtains a human body is still born blind, without a tongue, without ears, without hands. Śāriputra brings up the five heinous sins for comparison, and the Buddha rules: 「不應言相似」 tr. "it should not be said to be like them"—the five heinous sins only destroy the fleshly body, whereas to disparage prajñā is to disparage that from which the omniscience of the buddhas of the three times comes forth. At the end the Buddha is unwilling to tell the size of the body that one who breaks the Dharma receives, fearing that those with faith would vomit blood from grief and dread and that those without faith would add to their heavy sin; Śāriputra asks him to make it a bright warning for the future age, and it comes to rest in a single vow: 「寧失身命，終不破法」 tr. "I would rather lose body and life than ever break the Dharma". The results of the two roads of faith and slander set face to face—this is exactly what the two words of the chapter’s title, 「信謗」 tr. "faith and slander", stand upon.

Passage by Passage

1. Śāriputra asks about the background of one who has faith in and understands prajñā. As the unit opens Śāriputra asks the Buddha: if there is a bodhisattva-mahāsattva who has faith in and understands this prajñāpāramitā, 「從何處終，來生是間」 tr. "dying in what place does he come to be born here"? How long has it been since he aroused the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening? To how many buddhas has he made offerings? How long has he practised the six perfections, that he can understand the meaning of deep prajñā in accordance with it? This question treats 「信解」 tr. "faith and understanding" as a rare thing that needs explaining—it does not ask what prajñā is, but who the person who has faith in prajñā is and where he has come from. To ask about the person is to ask about the cause: a mind that can have faith must have provisions from which it has come, and this is the starting point of the positive line of the whole unit.

2. The Buddha answers—offerings to the buddhas of the ten directions, arousing the mind over immeasurable kalpas, constantly practising the six perfections. The Buddha answers: this bodhisattva has made offerings to the buddhas of the ten directions and comes to be born here; since he aroused the mind, immeasurable and boundless asaṃkhyeya hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭi of kalpas have passed; from his first arousing of the mind he has constantly practised the six perfections of dāna, śīla, kṣānti, vīrya, dhyāna, and prajñā; he has made offerings to immeasurable, boundless, inconceivable asaṃkhyeya buddhas. Three sentences answer three questions, and every sentence speaks of the long reach of time: the place he comes from is the presence of the buddhas of the ten directions, the time is immeasurable asaṃkhyeya kalpas, the practice is 「常行」 tr. "constant practice" without break from the first arousing of the mind. The threshold of faith in and understanding of prajñā is laid out without the least ambiguity—this is a capacity walked out step by step on the stage of provisions, not a chance gift of wisdom carried over from past lives.

3. Seeing and hearing prajñā is like seeing the Buddha and hearing the Dharma—because of the signless, the non-dual, and nothing to be attained. The Buddha says further: if this bodhisattva sees or hears prajñāpāramitā, he at once thinks 「我見佛，從佛聞法」 tr. "I see the Buddha, and from the Buddha I hear the Dharma"; he can understand the meaning of deep prajñā in accordance with it, 「以無相、無二、無所得故」 tr. "because of the signless, the non-dual, and nothing to be attained". The first half of the sentence is the utmost of the faithful mind—to see the scroll is the same as seeing the Buddha, to read the text of the sūtra is the same as hearing it in person; the second half is the guiding principle of understanding and wisdom—following the deep meaning does not come from wide learning, but from the three seals of the signless, the non-dual, and nothing to be attained. Faith at its utmost and understanding at its deepest here become one person: precisely because his mind grasps nothing, he can see the Dharma body directly within the prajñā of words and letters. Among the three seals, the signless blocks grasping at marks, the non-dual blocks the opposition of subject and object, and nothing to be attained blocks holding fast within the mind—later the treatise-author explains these three marks in their own order; here their general outline is first set up.

4. Prajñā is unheard and unseen, because dharmas are dull. Subhūti asks: can prajñā be heard, can it be seen? The Buddha answers: prajñā 「無有聞者、無有見者」 tr. "has no hearer and has no seer"; it is unheard and unseen, 「諸法鈍故」 tr. "because dharmas are dull"; and he carries this statement through the six perfections, inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eight limbs of the noble path, the ten powers and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, the Buddha and the Buddha’s path, saying of each one that it is unheard and unseen. ‘Dull’ means without knowing, without awareness, not giving rise to discrimination: in the real mark of all dharmas there is no opposition of subject and object, and so no hearer or seer can be set up. This question and answer stands as the other face of the preceding passage’s 「見經卷如見佛」 tr. "seeing the scroll is like seeing the Buddha", and it is precisely the point of doubt that the treatise-author will reconcile below.

5. The mark of a bodhisattva of first-aroused intent who practises deep prajñā. Subhūti asks how long one must walk the Buddha’s path to be able to practise deep prajñā, and the Buddha answers that it must be told case by case: there are bodhisattvas who, from their first arousing of intent, practise deep prajñā and the six perfections, 「以方便力故」 tr. "because of the power of skilful means"; toward all dharmas they destroy nothing, and they do not see any dharma as without benefit; they never depart from the six perfections or from the buddhas; they go from one buddha-world to another buddha-world, and whenever they wish to make offerings to the buddhas with their roots of goodness they obtain it at will; they are never born in a woman’s womb, never part from supernormal powers, never give rise to afflictions or to the mind of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas; they bring beings to maturity and purify buddha-worlds. From this one sees that whether one can practise does not depend on how long ago or how recently one aroused the mind, but on the power of skilful means—practising every practice while the mind does not cling: this is the summit of the positive line.

6. Those who practise the six perfections with something to be attained abandon it and leave when they hear deep prajñā. The negative line begins here: there are bodhisattvas who have seen many buddhas, immeasurable hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭi, and in the presence of those buddhas have practised giving, morality, patience, vigour, one-pointedness, and wisdom, 「皆以有所得故」 tr. "all with something to be attained"; hearing deep prajñā expounded, they rise from the assembly and leave, without reverence for deep prajñā or for the buddhas. In a former life they heard it, abandoned it, and left; in this life they hear it and again abandon it and leave, 「身心不和」 tr. "body and mind not in harmony", sowing the karma of the causes and conditions of delusion. The crux lies in the three words 「有所得」 tr. "with something to be attained": the outward practice of the six perfections is entirely the same, yet the difference between grasping at marks and being apart from marks makes one and the same practice lead in two directions—making offerings to countless buddhas and yet it becomes a cause of slandering the Dharma; the warning in this runs very deep.

7. To disparage prajñā is to disparage the omniscience of the buddhas of the three times; giving rise to the karma of breaking the Dharma, one falls into the great hells. Because of the sin of sowing the causes and conditions of delusion, on hearing deep prajñā expounded one disparages it; to disparage prajñā is to disparage the omniscience and the omniscience of all kinds of the buddhas of the past, the future, and the present—prajñā is that from which the wisdom of the buddhas comes forth, and to slander the source is to slander everything that flows from it. Disparaging the omniscience of the buddhas of the three times, one 「起破法業」 tr. "gives rise to the karma of breaking the Dharma", and because its causes and conditions gather, for immeasurable hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭi of years one falls into the great hells. The sūtra lays out the gradations of the sin clearly: the reason the verbal karma of disparagement and slander reaches such a sin lies not in the words themselves, but in the fact that what it disparages is the mother of the wisdom of the buddhas of the three times. This meaning is startling; the sūtra speaks it as it is, and the reader too should receive it as it is.

8. Passing through the hells and the animal realm of the ten directions; when the sin thins and a human body is obtained, the result is a maimed one. One who breaks the Dharma goes from one great hell to another great hell; when the fire-kalpa arises he is moved to a great hell in another region, passing through all ten directions, and because the causes and conditions of the karma of breaking the Dharma are not yet exhausted he comes back here again, round and round without end; the sufferings undergone in the animal realm are as told of the hells. As the heavy sin gradually thins, he may obtain a human body, 「生盲人家，生旃陀羅家，生除廁、擔死人種種下賤家」 tr. "born into a family of the blind, born into a family of caṇḍālas, born into families that clear latrines or carry corpses, all manner of low and base families"; either without eyes, or with one eye, or with eyes gone blind; either without a tongue, without ears, without hands; in the place where he is born there is no Buddha, no Dharma, no disciple of the Buddha. The length of the sin’s retribution and the maiming of the body received both come 「種破法業，積集厚重具足故」 tr. "because he has sown the karma of breaking the Dharma, and it has gathered, heavy and thick, and complete"—karma gathers of itself and the result completes itself; there is no official who punishes him.

9. Are the five heinous sins like breaking the Dharma?—It should not be said that they are alike. Śāriputra asks: are the five heinous sins like breaking the Dharma? The Buddha answers: 「不應言相似。」 tr. "It should not be said that they are alike." The five heinous sins—killing one’s father, killing one’s mother, killing an arhat, drawing blood from the Buddha’s body, and breaking the Saṅgha—are the gravest sins in the teaching of the śrāvakas, and lead to a fall into the Avīci hell; Śāriputra brings them up for comparison as the extreme of sin, yet the Buddha rules outright that one cannot even call them alike. This ruling is the cutting edge of this unit: the weight of a sin is not settled by the ferocity of the outward act, but by the depth and breadth of the Dharma that is destroyed. What the five heinous sins destroy is a matter of one body or one assembly; what slandering the Dharma destroys is that from which all the wisdom of the buddhas comes forth—as for why they are not alike, the sūtra first sets out a sixfold loss of both self and others, and the treatise then unfolds it in two layers, with the simile of parents’ love for their child and the distinction of the fleshly body and the Dharma body; the reader should look at it together with what follows below.

10. Disparaging it oneself and teaching others to disparage it—the sixfold loss of both self and others. The Buddha gives the reason why they are not alike: one who disparages and has no faith in deep prajñā says 「不應學是法，是非法、非善、非佛教，諸佛不說是語」 tr. "this dharma should not be studied; this is not the Dharma, not wholesome, not the Buddha’s teaching; the buddhas do not speak these words"—this person disparages prajñā himself and also teaches others to disparage it; he ruins his own body and also ruins the bodies of others; he drinks poison himself and kills his own body, and also makes others drink poison; he loses his own body and also loses the bodies of others; he himself does not know and has no faith, and also teaches others so that they have no faith and do not know. The sin of the five heinous sins stops at what one body commits; the sin of slandering the Dharma is a chain linking self and others: once the words of slander are out, they become a condition for others’ lack of faith; the poison is not only drunk by oneself, but passed on to be drunk by one after another—the contagiousness of the sin is exactly where it exceeds the five heinous sins.

11. One who defiles the Dharma falls into a nature of decline, turbidity, and blackness—not even hearing his name is allowed. The Buddha says: such a person—「我不聽聞其名字，何況眼見」 tr. "I do not allow even his name to be heard, how much less to see him with the eyes"! Know that such a person is called one who defiles the Dharma, 「為墮衰濁黑性」 tr. "he has fallen into a nature of decline, turbidity, and blackness"; those who listen to his words and have faith in what he says also undergo such suffering. The Buddha’s not allowing his name to be heard is not hatred of the person; it makes clear how dreadful his dharma is: what one who defiles the Dharma defiles is the Dharma on which the wisdom-life of beings relies, and to draw near to him is to be stained. 「若人破般若波羅蜜，當知是名為破法人」 tr. "If someone breaks prajñāpāramitā, know that he is called one who breaks the Dharma"—the name ‘breaking the Dharma’ does not depend on outward acts such as burning sūtras or destroying images; it depends on disparaging and slandering without faith and teaching others to disparage and slander; this definition must be kept in mind. Decline is the mark of wearing away, turbidity is the mark of obscuring and confusion, blackness is a nature formed by the accumulation of what is unwholesome; the treatise-author gives a proper explanation of each of the three words below, and here the sūtra first marks them with a general name.

12. The Buddha does not tell the size of the body received—fearing that those with faith would grieve and dread, and those without faith would add to their sin. Śāriputra asks the size of the body that one who breaks the Dharma receives, and the Buddha is unwilling to tell: if one who breaks the Dharma heard the size of the body he receives, 「便當吐熱血，若死、若近死苦」 tr. "he would at once vomit hot blood, and either die or suffer a pain close to death"; hearing that such a body carries such heavy sin, he would grieve greatly, 「如箭入心，漸漸乾枯」 tr. "as if an arrow had entered the heart, gradually withering away". The Buddha’s not telling is itself a teaching of the Dharma: if the weight of the result is such that merely hearing it could cause death, then what it actually is can be known. One who breaks the Dharma, thinking to himself that because of the sin of breaking the Dharma he obtains such a great, ugly body and undergoes such immeasurable suffering, grieves and withers—this thought itself is already a portion of the retribution. Here too one sees the sense of measure in teaching the Dharma: where the words can benefit, they are spoken; where the words would only add grief and dread, or the sin of lack of faith, they stop—compassion does not lie in saying everything.

13. Making a bright warning for the future age. Śāriputra will not let it rest: may the Buddha tell it, 「為未來世作明誡」 tr. "to make a bright warning for the future age", so that people know that because the karma of breaking the Dharma gathers one obtains a great, ugly body and undergoes great suffering. The Buddha grants half of it: if people of later ages hear that the karma of breaking the Dharma has gathered, heavy and thick, and complete, and that one undergoes long, long, immeasurable suffering in the great hells, then when they hear of this long, long, immeasurable suffering, it is 「足為未來世作明誡」 tr. "enough to make a bright warning for the future age". The Buddha still does not tell the size of the body, but allows only the long duration of the suffering to serve as the warning—the use of a bright warning lies not in lurid detail but in the certainty of cause and effect. This passage is also this chapter’s own note on why it speaks of the heavy sin of slandering the Dharma: it is spoken not to threaten, but to warn.

14. I would rather lose body and life than ever break the Dharma. Śāriputra finally declares: white and pure good men and good women, hearing this Dharma, have enough to take as a support—「寧失身命，終不破法」 tr. "they would rather lose body and life than ever break the Dharma", thinking to themselves that if they broke the Dharma they would undergo such suffering. This is the closing sentence of the sūtra text of the First Part: what arises on hearing the retribution for slandering the Dharma is not paralysing fear but a vow—body and life may be lost, the Dharma may not be broken. The treatise-author explains the word 「依止」 tr. "support" below: hearing of this suffering, one no longer dares to do it. To revere cause and effect and so to protect the Dharma is precisely the right response of a white and pure nature after hearing the warning—the same passage on retribution is an indictment for the slanderer and a protective charm for the white and pure; the sūtra closes with this vow, showing that the landing point the bright warning looks for lies not in fear but in vow.

15. The treatise explains the occasion of the question—knowing the noble Dharma before one is noble. The treatise-author explains why Śāriputra put the question: prajñā is deep and subtle, 「聞者尚難，何況能行」 tr. "hard even for those who hear it, how much more for those who can practise it", and so one who has faith in and understands prajñā is called rare. Śāriputra already has an inference in his mind: this person should have come, at death, from a good world, and should not be one who has newly aroused intent, made few offerings to buddhas, and practised the six perfections little—「必是大德人，未聖而能知聖法故」 tr. "he must be a person of great virtue, because though not yet noble he can know the noble Dharma". The sentence about knowing the noble Dharma before one is noble is the eye of the question: that someone on the stage of the ordinary person can have faith in and understand the realm of noble wisdom—this itself needs explaining, and from it the four causes and conditions of the Buddha’s answer are drawn out. Within the wonder of the question the direction of the answer is already contained.

16. Understanding the meaning in accordance with it—not grasping at marks, not being attached to emptiness. The treatise-author explains 「能隨順解深般若波羅蜜義」 tr. "can understand the meaning of deep prajñāpāramitā in accordance with it": this bodhisattva, toward all dharmas, is 「不取相、不著空，行空行，和合五波羅蜜行般若波羅蜜；用大慈悲心，為一切眾生行般若波羅蜜故」 tr. "not grasping at marks, not attached to emptiness, practising the practice of emptiness, bringing together the five pāramitās to practise prajñāpāramitā; because, with a mind of great kindness and compassion, he practises prajñāpāramitā for the sake of all beings". The four phrases are a complete definition of understanding in accordance: because he does not grasp at marks he does not fall to the extreme of existence; because he is not attached to emptiness he does not fall to the extreme of emptiness; because he brings together the five perfections, the wisdom of emptiness does not go alone; because of the mind of great kindness and compassion, the wisdom that delivers oneself is itself the practice that delivers others. The words ‘in accordance’ can be understood from this—following the mark of prajñā in practice, neither adding to it nor taking from it by one’s own ideas.

17. The four causes and conditions fulfilled—seeing the scroll is like seeing the Buddha. The treatise-author explains the four causes and conditions of this background: he has come, at death, from the pure worlds of the buddhas of the ten directions (to deliver beings with whom he has affinity, and because he shares causes and conditions with Śākyamuni Buddha); because he aroused the mind immeasurable kalpas ago, the power of his merit is thick; from the arousing of the mind he has constantly practised the six perfections (distinguishing him from one who aroused the mind long ago but does not practise meritorious deeds); because he practises constantly, he can see and make offerings to immeasurable buddhas. The four causes and conditions fulfilled, he obtains immeasurable merit and wisdom, his afflictions are thin, his mind is pliant, his faculties of faith and wisdom are sharp, and so he enters deeply into prajñā: on seeing the scroll, at that very moment there arises in his mind ‘it is like seeing the Buddha’, and on opening the scroll to seek its meaning, at that very moment there arises in his mind ‘it is like hearing from the Buddha’. The treatise-author also sets out the three marks of understanding in accordance: all is signless; going beyond the two dharmas of the twelve sense-fields; and, within the non-dual Dharma, the mind being attached to nothing, which is called nothing to be attained.

18. One mark, the signless—the simile of the hundred rivers returning to the sea. The treatise-author explains ‘unheard and unseen’: Subhūti, hearing that to see the scroll is like seeing the Buddha, suspects that this may involve some attachment, and so asks whether it can be seen and heard; his meaning is that prajñā is ultimate emptiness, which even the divine eye and divine ear cannot see or hear, how much less the fleshly eye and fleshly ear. The Buddha answers in accord with his intent that it cannot be seen or heard; the causes and conditions are that when all dharmas enter prajñā, 「皆一相無相，是中無分別聞者、見者及可聞、可見」 tr. "all are one mark, the signless; within it there is no discrimination of hearer or seer, or of what can be heard or what can be seen". Ordinary people discriminate the six faculties as sharp and the six sense-objects as dull; when all dharmas enter prajñā, 「如百川歸海，皆為一味」 tr. "as the hundred rivers return to the sea, all become one taste"—therefore it is said that dharmas are dull. ‘Dull’ is not a disparaging word; it is a word that dissolves the opposition of sharp and dull: when the hundred rivers enter the sea, salt and fresh are both lost, and the distinction of sharp and dull has nowhere left to apply.

19. When beings and the Dharma are apart from each other, there is no hearing and no seeing. The treatise-author adds one more sentence: when beings are apart from the Dharma, they cannot hear and cannot see; when the Dharma is apart from beings, it too cannot be heard and cannot be seen. The matter of hearing and seeing is from the start a provisional establishment arising when beings and the Dharma come together: take the person who can hear on his own, without any Dharma that is heard, and hearing is not established; take the Dharma that is heard on its own, without any person who can hear, and hearing again is not established. Since it is a provisional establishment through coming together, the hearer and the seer are both without self-nature—this sentence uses the meaning of dependent arising to complete the meaning of the real mark in the passage above; unheard and unseen is not a closing of the Dharma treasury, but a statement, as it truly is, that subject and object are fundamentally empty. Taking the two passages together, one speaks from the one mark of all dharmas, the other from the mutual dependence of subject and object, and both come back to this: within prajñā there is no fixed, real hearing or seeing to be found.

20. The three explanations of practising, the power of skilful means, and destroying nothing, and the two benefits. The treatise-author poses a question: it has already been asked above how long ago intent was aroused; why ask again now? The answer: the Buddha spoke of prajñā in two marks—saying both that it can be seen and heard and that it cannot be seen or heard—and so Subhūti asks how long it takes a bodhisattva to obtain this skilful means, 「能行有、能行無，行有不墮三界、行無不墮斷滅」 tr. "to be able to practise existence and to be able to practise non-existence, practising existence without falling into the three realms, practising non-existence without falling into annihilation". The Buddha answers that it must be told case by case. The treatise-author explains, word by word, the one of first-aroused intent who can practise: practising is 「一心信受常行」 tr. "receiving it in faith with one mind and constantly practising it"; the power of skilful means is practising the six perfections and giving rise to merit while the mind does not cling; destroying nothing among all dharmas is that the power of faith and wisdom is great, so that on hearing the dharmas of the Great Vehicle, of the śrāvakas, or of those of the outside paths, one destroys none of them, and draws from them two benefits—discriminating path and non-path, relinquishing what is not to be practised and practising what is right; and all dharmas entering prajñā, where there is 「無是、無非，無破、無受」 tr. "no right and no wrong, no breaking and no receiving".

21. The chain of karma and result in one who aroused intent long ago but does not receive it in faith. The treatise-author explains the negative side: there are bodhisattvas who aroused intent long ago and have made offerings to a thousand myriad koṭi of buddhas, 「用有所得行六波羅蜜，不信受是般若波羅蜜」 tr. "practising the six perfections with something to be attained, and not receiving this prajñāpāramitā in faith". Their karma and results form a chain: in past lives they heard deep prajñā, did not have faith in it or receive it, and rose from their seats and left; now, when the Buddha expounds it for them, they still do not have faith in it or receive it; the causes and conditions of the karma of not having faith and not receiving give rise to the causes and conditions of the karma of delusion; because of delusion, 「疑悔惡邪，著心轉增」 tr. "doubt, regret, evil, and wrongness, and the attached mind, grow and grow"; because the attached mind grows and grows, in the midst of the great assembly they disparage and destroy prajñā; because they destroy prajñā, they break the omniscience of the buddhas of the three times and the ten directions; because of the sin of breaking omniscience, on changing bodies they fall into the great hells. Every link in the chain is the result of the link before and the cause of the link after—slandering the Dharma is not the lapse of a single thought, but the attached mind accumulating until it bursts its banks.

22. The great hell is Avīci—grief is suffering of mind, vexation is suffering of body. The treatise-author explains 「大地獄」 tr. "the great hells": this is the Avīci hell, where for immeasurable hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭi of asaṃkhyeya years one undergoes grief, suffering, and vexation; 「憂愁是心苦，惱是身苦」 tr. "grief is suffering of mind; vexation is suffering of body". One sentence of gloss divides the suffering of the hells into two headings: the torment undergone by the body is vexation; the mind knowing there is no time of release and being seared and pressed by it is grief. The sin of breaking the Dharma arises from an attached mind and wrong view and is completed through the mouth, and its retribution too is undergone in both mind and body—the heading of suffering of mind corresponds exactly to the doubt, regret, evil, and wrongness at the time the karma was made, and the heading of suffering of body corresponds exactly to teaching others to disparage and slander and ruining the bodies of others. In explaining the hells the treatise-author does not dramatise with a single word, but only makes a glossing division into headings, which on the contrary makes its weight credible and fit to serve as a warning.

23. From one great hell to another great hell—a hundred koṭi of Sumerus, a hundred koṭi of Avīcis. The treatise-author explains the mark of passing round and round: just as, through the causes and conditions of merit, there are the six heavens of desire above, so, through the causes and conditions of sinful karma, there are the eight great hells below, each with sixteen lesser hells, and Avīci is the greatest; in the three-thousand great-thousand world there are a hundred koṭi of Mount Sumerus, and so there are a hundred koṭi of Avīci hells; therefore it is said that one goes from one Avīci to another Avīci, 「如人從會至會」 tr. "as a person goes from one gathering to another gathering"; when the fire-kalpa arises and the sin is not yet exhausted, one is moved to other worlds of the ten directions; when the fire-kalpa arises there in turn, one passes on again and comes back here, and so without end. The simile of going from gathering to gathering is extremely cold and stark: the migration between hells is, in the eyes of sinful karma, as ordinary as going off to a gathering—driven by the power of karma, wherever one goes is a hell.

24. When the sin is slightly reduced, one passes round and round through the animal realm. When the sin of breaking prajñā is slightly reduced, one is reborn, round and round, 「勤苦畜生中」 tr. "among toiling, suffering animals"; when the fire-kalpa arises here, one is born again among the animals of another world, undergoing suffering round and round; when the fire-kalpa arises there, one comes back here and passes round and round again as before. After the hells there is not at once a human body; in between there is still the animal realm, and the mark of passing round and round there is entirely the same as in the hells—when the fire-kalpa arises one is moved, and while the sin is not yet exhausted one comes back. The emergence from the retribution for sin has its order: when the heavy retribution is exhausted, the remaining retribution continues, like water receding, leaving a mark at every level; it does not suddenly grow light merely because one has left the hells. The treatise specially uses the two words ‘toiling, suffering’ of the animal realm—bearing loads and doing labour, driven and goaded by people—which matches exactly the karma of having once despised the Dharma and those who expound the Dharma; the mark of the remaining retribution still corresponds to the karmic cause without confusion.

25. Born blind, without a tongue, without ears, without hands—the marks of the sin correspond one by one to the karmic causes. The treatise-author explains the causes of the maimed retribution in a human body: one is born into a family of the blind, 「不欲見般若波羅蜜罪故」 tr. "because of the sin of not wishing to see prajñāpāramitā"; because one despised those who expound the Dharma, one is born into low and base families such as those of caṇḍālas and those who clear dung and carry corpses; 「毀呰說法者故無舌，不欲聞故無耳，麾手非撥故無手」 tr. "because one disparaged those who expound the Dharma, one is without a tongue; because one did not wish to hear, one is without ears; because one waved one’s hands to reject and brush it away, one is without hands". Four sentences, four correspondences: once one did not wish to see, now one has no eyes with which to see; once one disparaged, now one has no tongue with which to speak; once one did not wish to hear, now one has no ears with which to hear; once one waved the hands to brush it away, now one has no hands to wave. Further, though this person’s mind loves the Buddha, because of delusion he 「毀滅佛母，破壞法藏」 tr. "destroys the mother of the buddhas and breaks the Dharma treasury", and so he is born where there is no Buddha, no Dharma, and no Saṅgha. The result is not a punishment added from outside; it is the mark of the karma appearing of itself.

26. Why the hungry ghosts are not spoken of—because it is hatred and delusion, not avarice. The treatise-author poses a question: among the three evil destinies, why is birth among the hungry ghosts not spoken of? The answer: those who break and destroy the Dharma mostly do so through two afflictions, 「所謂瞋恚、愚癡。慳貪發故墮餓鬼，此中無慳故不說」 tr. "namely anger and hatred, and delusion. It is because avarice arises that one falls among the hungry ghosts; here there is no avarice, and so it is not spoken of". This question and answer shows the precision of the treatise-author’s classification: each of the three evil destinies has its own principal cause—avarice brings on the hungry ghosts, hatred and delusion bring on the hells and the animals; the karma of slandering the Dharma arises from wrong view, hatred, and pride, and is not associated with avarice, and so its retribution passes through the hells and the animals but not through the hungry ghosts. Results and afflictions call forth one another kind by kind; this is not something a vague single phrase like ‘evil has evil retribution’ can cover. The sickness of one who slanders the Dharma lies in relying on what he has understood and being hateful and proud toward the deep Dharma, not in stinginess with wealth or Dharma; therefore of the three evil destinies he passes through two and is spared one—being spared is not leniency, but shows precisely how exact and strict karma and result are, without overflow.

27. Why the five heinous sins are brought up, and the sixfold way in which they are not alike. The treatise-author explains why Śāriputra brought up the five heinous sins: Śāriputra is a śrāvaka, who had constantly heard that the five heinous sins are the gravest and lead to a fall into Avīci to undergo suffering for a kalpa; śrāvakas do not fully know that making offerings to prajñā obtains a great result and that slandering and disparaging prajñā obtains a great sin, and so he brought up the five heinous sins in his question. The answer that they are not alike is given 「以相去懸遠故」 tr. "because they are separated by a vast distance": one who disparages and slanders prajñā loses great benefit himself and also makes others lose it; he himself departs from it and also makes others depart; he himself destroys his roots of goodness and also destroys others’ roots of goodness; he himself smears on the poison of wrong view and also smears others with the poison; he loses his own body and also loses the bodies of others; because he himself does not know and is attached to love of dharmas, he breaks it and also makes others break it. In all six, self and others are named together, which shows exactly that the sin of slandering the Dharma lies in its spreading contagion from one to another, unlike the five heinous sins, which stop at what one does oneself.

28. The simile of parents’ love for their child—head, eyes, marrow, and brain piled higher than Sumeru. The treatise-author uses a simile to make clear how heavy is what is destroyed: parents’ love for their child is a 「恩極一世」 tr. "kindness that reaches only to the end of one life", and they love it also because of causes and conditions; the bodhisattva who practises prajñā, through boundless lives, cherishes beings with a deep mind. Parents who cherish their child 「無能以一眼與者」 tr. "are none of them able to give it even one eye"; the one who practises prajñā, through boundless kalpas, has given head, eyes, marrow, and brain, 「積過須彌，以施眾生」 tr. "piled up higher than Sumeru, giving them to beings". The point of the simile is to bring out how the kindness of the one who practises prajñā surpasses that of parents—in time, one life against boundless lives; in giving, not being able to give one eye against head, eyes, marrow, and brain piled higher than Sumeru. To destroy prajñā is to cut off that from which such kindness comes forth, and the weight of its sin can be measured by this.

29. The five heinous sins only destroy the fleshly body—the sin of disparaging prajñā has no comparison. The treatise-author gives his ruling directly: drawing blood from the Buddha’s body and killing an arhat 「但壞肉身，不壞法身」 tr. "only destroy the fleshly body; they do not destroy the Dharma body"; destroying the Saṅgha is separating it from its following and praising five dharmas, and 「不壞般若」 tr. "does not destroy prajñā"—therefore the five heinous sins cannot be like destroying prajñā; 「般若波羅蜜能令人作佛，毀般若罪則無喻」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā can make people buddhas; the sin of disparaging prajñā has no comparison". He further explains the deep intent of not allowing even the name to be heard: one who breaks prajñā may, through merit from former lives, be widely learned and well read, rich, noble, powerful and virtuous, skilled in conversation, and assisted by the hosts of Māra, and a bodhisattva who has not yet attained avaivartika is easily drawn in on seeing the flourishing of his following; therefore not even his name is allowed to be heard, how much less attaching oneself to him and receiving his teaching—the bodhisattva wishes to increase wholesome dharmas while this person wishes to break the Dharma, 「二事相違故」 tr. "because the two things are contrary to each other".

30. The explanation of decline, turbidity, and blackness—the simile of turbid, muddy water. The treatise-author explains 「衰濁」 tr. "decline and turbidity": like a person struck by decline, who has fine clothes and good food yet never has colour or strength, and who works his body hard at his tasks while his property wastes away day by day; because this person destroys the supreme Dharma Jewel of all the buddhas, though his karma of body and speech is good, and he keeps the precepts, gives, and praises the sūtras, 「善法終不增長；如濁水泥，不見面像，亦不中飲」 tr. "his wholesome dharmas never increase; like turbid, muddy water, in which one cannot see the image of one’s face, and which is not fit to drink". This person’s wrong views, doubt, and regret constantly disturb his mind; he is deeply attached to the dharma he heard before, and says that prajñā is without anything existent, empty, not firm, without sin or merit; because turbidity and confusion obscure his mind, he does not see the pure, real mark of the Dharma. As for 「黑性」 tr. "a nature of blackness": 「佛法中善法名白，不善法名黑」 tr. "in the Buddha’s Dharma, wholesome dharmas are called white, and unwholesome dharmas are called black"; because he constantly accumulates the unwholesome, he forms an unwholesome nature; those who receive his words in faith have the same sin. Keeping the precepts and giving, and yet wholesome dharmas do not grow—this is exactly the most dreadful part of the retribution for slandering the Dharma.

31. The question of the size of the body—the two causes and conditions for which the Buddha does not answer. The treatise-author explains the final question and answer: Śāriputra, having already heard of the times and places of undergoing the sin but not yet of the size of the body, 「意欲聞佛說其大身」 tr. "wished in his mind to hear the Buddha speak of that great body"—moreover, just as Śakra’s body is ten li tall and pleasure pervades it throughout, so he wished to know whether, if the body undergoing the sin is great, the suffering undergone is also much. The Buddha does not tell it for two causes and conditions: first, it has already been said above that one undergoes suffering and vexation for a long time in two evil destinies, and if he further spoke of a great, ugly, and evil body, people might not have faith in it, and those without faith would undergo long and severe suffering; second, if they had faith they would be greatly grieved and afraid, 「憂怖故風發，吐熱血死」 tr. "and because of grief and fear the wind would stir, and they would vomit hot blood and die", and even if they did not die their bodies would always be withered; and those without faith would add to their heavy sin in later lives. Both ends bring harm and neither brings any benefit, and so he does not tell it—in this not telling lies precisely the teacher’s twofold protective care for the two kinds of faculties in those who hear the Dharma.

32. A person of white nature and merit has enough to take as a support. Śāriputra asks again: may the Buddha tell it out of pity for people of the future age. The Buddha says: 「若有善根白性福德人，足作依止。」 tr. "If there is a person with roots of goodness, a white nature, and merit, it is enough for him to take as a support." The treatise-author explains it: a white nature is one 「與黑性相違」 tr. "contrary to a nature of blackness"; to take as a support is 「聞是受苦，更不敢作」 tr. "hearing of this suffering undergone, he no longer dares to do it". He further settles that the effect of hearing the Dharma depends on faith: if one has no faith, then even if the great body were spoken of, one would still have no faith; if one has faith, then 「聞上受苦久遠足可信」 tr. "hearing of the long duration of the suffering undergone, told above, is enough to be believed"—so there is no need to go on to tell the size of the body. The First Part closes here: the reason a bright warning can warn lies not in how startlingly it is told, but in whether the hearer is of white nature or of black nature; the same passage on the results of slandering the Dharma is a support for a person of white nature, and a condition of lack of faith and heavy sin for a person of black nature.

Do Not Misread

Do not read the teaching that slandering the Dharma leads to falling into the hells as words of intimidation and so step around it. The sūtra itself states its purpose in teaching this: Śāriputra asks for a bright warning for the future age, and the Buddha grants that the long duration of the suffering is enough to be a bright warning—it is a warning, not a threat. Moreover, the Buddha twice refuses to tell the size of the body received, fearing that those with faith would grieve, dread, and vomit blood, and that those without faith would add to their heavy sin; this shows precisely that the speaker cares for his hearers at every step, with no trace of intent to intimidate. This chapter should be read as a person of white nature takes it as a support—I would rather lose body and life than ever break the Dharma—and not as the faithless do, dismissing it as a skilful-means device and letting it lightly pass.

Do not read the bodhisattvas ‘who practise the six perfections with something to be attained’ as people of the outside paths or evil people. The sūtra says plainly that such people have seen many buddhas, immeasurable hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭi, and have practised the six perfections in the presence of those buddhas—they are people within the Buddha’s gate who have cultivated for a long time, and only because they always practised with a mind of something to be attained, on hearing ultimate emptiness it is as if what they rely on were snatched away, and first they doubt, then they slander. The root of the calamity of slandering the Dharma lies not outside the gate but in grasping at marks inside the gate; this is exactly the closest warning in this chapter—making offerings to countless buddhas does not guarantee that one will not slander prajñā; if the attached mind is not removed, it grows and grows until it bursts its banks.

Do not read 「諸法鈍故」 tr. "because dharmas are dull" as meaning that dharmas are benighted and useless. ‘Dull’ is said against the ordinary person’s discrimination of the six faculties as sharp and the six sense-objects as dull: when all dharmas enter prajñā, like the hundred rivers returning to the sea they all become one taste, and the distinction of sharp against dull has nowhere left to apply, so it is called ‘dull’ as a whole. This dullness is precisely another name for the one mark, the signless, and does not contradict seeing the scroll being like seeing the Buddha—the treatise-author states plainly that the Buddha spoke of prajñā in two marks, both that it can be seen and heard and that it cannot be seen or heard; the practitioner should find skilful means on both sides, and should not cling to one sentence and discard the other.

Do not read the comparison of the five heinous sins with slandering the Dharma as saying that the five heinous sins are light. When the Buddha says ‘it should not be said that they are alike’, he is saying that the sin of slandering the Dharma is so heavy it has no comparison—prajñā can make people buddhas, and to disparage it is to disparage that from which the omniscience of the buddhas of the three times comes forth—not that drawing blood from the Buddha’s body or killing an arhat may be regarded lightly. That the five heinous sins only destroy the fleshly body and do not destroy the Dharma body is a comparison in terms of the depth and breadth of what is destroyed, not a grading of weight in terms of what may or may not be done. Both are karma of the utmost gravity; the intent of the sūtra lies in showing the honour of prajñā, not in lowering the guard against the five heinous sins.

Do not read 「我不聽聞其名字」 tr. "I do not allow even his name to be heard" as meaning that the Buddha bears hatred. As for the Buddha not allowing his name to be heard and not permitting anyone to attach themselves to him, the treatise-author explains it clearly: one who breaks prajñā may have merit from former lives, be widely learned and well read, and have a flourishing following, and a bodhisattva who has not yet attained non-retrogression is easily drawn along on seeing him—not allowing his name to be heard is to protect the root of faith of those not yet mature, as one keeps away from a poisoned well without hating the well. Connected with this, 「聽其言、信用其語，亦受如是苦」 tr. "those who listen to his words and have faith in and make use of what he says also undergo such suffering" is not guilt by association either; to receive the words of slander in faith is itself to sow the cause of one’s own lack of faith, and cause and effect each continue on their own.

Bearing on Practice

The first mirror this chapter offers for daily use is to examine one’s own reaction on hearing the deep Dharma. On hearing the teaching of ultimate emptiness and of nothing to be attained, does what arises in the mind wish, with reverent faith, to investigate it, or is it displeased and wish to leave? The sūtra describes the mark of one who slanders the Dharma: at first it is no more than 「聞是甚深般若波羅蜜，不樂，便捨去」 tr. "hearing this very deep prajñāpāramitā, he is displeased and abandons it and leaves"—from displeasure to abandoning to disparaging, there is no chasm in between. When, in hearing the Dharma day to day, one meets something that runs against one’s own views, first hold down the thought of displeasure, and remember the words about abandoning it in a former life and abandoning it again in this life; this is guarding against slander before it sprouts.

When practising wholesome dharmas, guard against the mind of something to be attained. The record of the negative figures in this chapter is startling—they have seen many buddhas and fully practised the six perfections—yet they fail because they always acted with something to be attained. In daily life, in giving, keeping the precepts, and reciting sūtras, besides the outward act always ask oneself one question: how much grasping at marks is in this? There is no need to abandon practice because of this; only let practice go together with the understanding of being apart from marks, as the treatise says, because of the power of skilful means, though one gives rise to the causes and conditions of merit, the mind does not cling.

The karma of speech above all must be guarded with regard to the Dharma. The karma of breaking the Dharma is completed through words of disparagement, and the result is being without a tongue, without ears, without hands, corresponding mark by mark. When people today discuss the Dharma, words of praise and blame come out of the mouth very easily; toward a deep Dharma one has not yet seen through, it is better to hold a mind that keeps the doubt open and asks for instruction, and not to pronounce the verdict that it is not the Dharma or not spoken by the Buddha. On seeing others teach the Dharma, even if there is something open to question, question the meaning and do not despise the person—the retribution for despising those who expound the Dharma is all there in the sūtra.

Establish a vow for oneself with 「寧失身命，終不破法」 tr. "I would rather lose body and life than ever break the Dharma". Śāriputra establishes this vow on behalf of white and pure good men and good women, and it is exactly the right practice after hearing the bright warning: not panic and fear for oneself, but setting the mind that protects the Dharma above body and life. In daily life this vow comes down to two things—oneself not slandering, and also not having faith in or making use of the words of slanderers, not rejoicing in arguments that slander the Dharma; those who listen to his words and have faith in what he says also undergo such suffering, and so to keep away from them is itself to keep the vow.

Further Resonances

The First Part is the first round in which the two roads of faith and slander are set face to face. The positive road is set up from Śāriputra’s question: where does one who has faith in and understands prajñā come from—the four causes and conditions of offerings to the buddhas of the ten directions, arousing the mind over immeasurable kalpas, and constantly practising the six perfections, fulfilled, so that seeing the scroll is like seeing the Buddha and opening the scroll is like hearing from the Buddha, and he understands the deep meaning in accordance with it by the signless, the non-dual, and nothing to be attained; though of first-aroused intent, if he has the power of skilful means he can practise it, practising existence without falling into the three realms, practising non-existence without falling into annihilation. The negative road bursts its banks from the three Chinese characters rendered here as ‘with something to be attained’: long practising the six perfections while grasping at marks is never transformed, on hearing deep prajñā one first doubts and then slanders; to disparage prajñā is to disparage the omniscience of the buddhas of the three times; one gives rise to the karma of breaking the Dharma, falls into the great hells and passes round and round through the ten directions, and when the sin thins and a human body is obtained, one is still born blind, without a tongue, without ears, without hands, the karmic causes and the marks of the results corresponding one by one. The one question comparing the five heinous sins settles the magnitude of the sin—they only destroy the fleshly body and do not destroy the Dharma body, so it should not be said that they are alike, and the sin of disparaging prajñā has no comparison; the one explanation of decline, turbidity, and blackness settles the present-life mark of the slanderer—keeping the precepts and giving, and yet wholesome dharmas never increase, like turbid, muddy water, in which one cannot see the image of one’s face and which is not fit to drink. At the end the Buddha does not tell the size of the body received but grants the long duration of the suffering as a bright warning, and it comes to rest in this: a person of white nature has enough to take as a support—I would rather lose body and life than ever break the Dharma. What the First Part establishes is the full scope of one passage of sūtra and one passage of treatise in the sixty-second fascicle: the causes and results of the faithful and the causes and results of the slanderer set side by side, while on the road of slander its sin has been spoken of but its prevention not yet fully told. How to restrain body, speech, and mind so as to escape this heavy sin, how many causes and conditions there are for disparaging and slandering deep prajñā, and on to the right meaning of neither bound nor released and ultimately pure—the Last Part of this chapter unfolds these in continuation, and they are not anticipated here.

Faith and Slander, Last Part: The Heavy Sin of Breaking the Dharma through the Karma of Speech, and Its Four Causes and Conditions; Prajñā Neither Bound nor Released, Hard to Believe and Hard to Understand; Because Form Is Pure, Prajñā Is Pure; the Three Poisons, the Twelve Links, and the Three Times All Pure; the Two Kinds of Breaking Prajñā and the Two Kinds of Faith

What Is Being Asked

The First Part carried the sin of slandering the Dharma to its extreme: to disparage prajñā is precisely to disparage the omniscience of the buddhas of the three times; because of the causes and conditions of the karma of breaking the Dharma, one falls for immeasurable koṭi of kalpas into the great hells, passing through the ten directions, and when the sin has thinned and one obtains a human body, one is still born blind, without a tongue, without ears, without hands, born into low and base families without the Buddha’s Dharma; moreover it judged that the five heinous sins are not like breaking the Dharma, the sin of breaking the Dharma being so heavy that the Buddha will not even tell the size of the body in which it is undergone. The Last Part takes up this sin and begins by asking where it comes from: is so heavy a sin accomplished merely by gathering the karma of speech? The Buddha answers that it is so, and opens four causes and conditions of disparaging and slandering the deep prajñā—being driven by Māra, not having faith in the deep Dharma, keeping company with evil friends, and anger and arrogance. Once the source of the sin is clear, the sūtra turns to the very thing the sin slanders: why is prajñā so very deep, hard to believe and hard to understand? The answer lies in 「不縛不解」 tr. "neither bound nor released", and in 「無所有性」 tr. "a nature without anything existent"; from neither bound nor released it advances further to ‘because form is pure, prajñā is pure’, and on to the purity of lust, hatred, and delusion, the purity of the twelve links link by link, the purity of the conditioned and the unconditioned, the purity of the three times—purity all the way until ‘ultimately pure, like space’. At the end the treatise-author gathers up the whole chapter: prajñā is ultimately pure, the Dharma treasury of the buddhas of the three times, and because one breaks it one falls into the hells; he further divides the breaking of prajñā into two kinds and faith in prajñā into two kinds, and answers the question of how hard it is for a person of the five heinous sins to have faith in prajñā, with the example of King Ajātaśatru, whose sin was removed and who received the prediction. What the Last Part asks, in the end, is a pair of outside and inside: why is the Dharma that is slandered pure to such a degree, and why is the sin of the one who slanders heavy to such a degree—the purer the Dharma, the heavier the sin of slandering it; the heaviness of the sin takes its measure precisely from the purity of the Dharma.

Passage by Passage

1. Guard the three karmas well, and escape six kinds of suffering. At the opening of the Last Part, Subhūti addresses the Buddha: good men and good women should well guard and protect the karma of body, speech, and mind, and not undergo such sufferings as these—either not seeing the Buddha, or not hearing the Dharma, or not drawing near to the Saṅgha, or being born in a world without a Buddha, or being born among humans but falling into a poor family, or others not believing and accepting their words. Each of the six sufferings is a suffering of being cut off from the Three Jewels and from one’s connection with the Dharma: seeing the Buddha, hearing the Dharma, and drawing near to the Saṅgha are the provisions of the Dharma body and the wisdom-life; being born in an age with a Buddha, being born in a family with sufficient means, and having one’s words believed by others are the conditions for cultivating the path; what the sin of breaking the Dharma takes away is precisely this whole line of connection with the Dharma. Subhūti places the guarding of the three karmas at the head of the sentence, bringing the heavy hell-retribution spoken of in the First Part back to the careful guarding of the three karmas in daily life—sin arises from karma, and to guard against sin one first guards against karma.

2. By gathering the karma of speech there is the heavy sin of breaking the Dharma; breaking one Dharma breaks the Three Jewels and right view together. Subhūti asks: is it because of gathering the karma of speech that there is this heavy sin of breaking the Dharma? The Buddha answers: just so. A deluded person leaves home and receives the precepts within the Buddha’s Dharma, yet disparages and does not accept the deep prajñā—to break prajñā is precisely to break the omniscience of the buddhas of the ten directions; because omniscience is broken, the Buddha Jewel is broken; because the Buddha Jewel is broken, the Dharma Jewel is broken; because the Dharma Jewel is broken, the Saṅgha Jewel is broken; because the Three Jewels are broken, the right view of the world is broken; because the right view of the world is broken, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the dharma of omniscience of all kinds are broken; from this one obtains immeasurable and boundless asaṃkhyeya sins, and undergoes immeasurable and boundless asaṃkhyeya sorrows and sufferings. This one chain is the skeleton of the meaning of sin and retribution in the whole chapter: prajñā is the mother of the buddhas, that from which omniscience comes forth, and so to slander this one Dharma is not to ruin one scroll of scripture, but to cut off at the root the entire lifeline of the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṅgha, of worldly and world-transcending right view; the sin is immeasurable precisely because what is broken is immeasurable. Above all, keep an eye on the four characters 「出家受戒」 tr. "leaving home and receiving the precepts"—this sin does not come from the outsiders’ paths, but from people attached to the Dharma within the gate of the Buddha’s Dharma.

3. The four causes and conditions of disparagement and slander, set out in summary. Subhūti asks how many causes and conditions there are for disparaging and destroying the deep prajñā, and the Buddha answers that there are four: first, being driven by Māra; second, not having faith in the deep Dharma, not believing and not understanding, the mind not attaining purity; third, keeping company with evil friends, the mind sunk in laziness, firmly attached to the five aggregates of clinging; fourth, much practising anger and hatred, exalting oneself and despising others. In the four conditions outer and inner intertwine: Māra is an outer condition, lack of faith and anger with arrogance are inner causes, and the third condition joins the outer condition of evil friends with the inner cause of laziness attached to the aggregates. Under each condition the sūtra repeats 「是愚癡人欲毀呰破壞深般若波羅蜜」 tr. "this deluded person wishes to disparage and destroy the deep prajñāpāramitā", chanting it four times over, so that a person will examine himself condition by condition—slandering the Dharma need not appear as evil speech; if even one of the four conditions is in the mind, the root of slander already lies hidden.

4. The karma of mind is the root of the karma of speech. The treatise-author first poses a question: it is the karma of speech that breaks the Dharma, so why does it say 「攝身口意業」 tr. "guard the karma of body, speech, and mind"? The answer: the karma of mind is the root of the karma of speech; to guard the karma of speech, one first guards the karma of mind; because the karma of mind is guarded, the karma of body and speech is also wholesome, and when the karma of body and speech is wholesome, the karma of mind is also wholesome. The three karmas give rise to one another, and their pivot lies in the mind: the mouth does not move of itself; it moves from the mind. So guarding against the sin of slandering the Dharma lies not in sealing the mouth but in treating the mind; if doubt and arrogance in the mind are not removed, the disparagement of the karma of speech will in the end have its time to break out. The treatise-author further points out the cause and condition Subhūti himself states—「莫受是諸苦」 tr. "not undergo these sufferings": the guarding against the six sufferings hangs entirely on this one word, guard.

5. To make a sin with one’s own tongue is great madness. People of the world take the karma of body as heavy and the karma of speech as light, and so Subhūti specially asks: is it only through the karma of speech that one obtains this sin? The Buddha approves his intent and shows: this deluded person has no pressing business of his own, no one to drive him, and nothing to gain, and yet by his own tongue alone he makes such a heavy sin—this is great madness! This mad person in a future age will leave home within the Buddha’s Dharma; those who have left home form five assemblies, and those who have received precepts form seven assemblies. The judgement of 「大狂」 tr. "great madness" must be looked at closely: the sins of killing and stealing still have profit and desire to aim at, but the sin of slandering the Dharma has no profit to gain and no one pressing him—it is made purely by his own tongue; to make the heaviest sin without any cause is why it is called great madness. And this mad person appears precisely within the Buddha’s gate, which connects directly with the passage below on the śrāvakas’ attachment to the Dharma.

6. The śrāvakas’ attachment to the Dharma: hearing of ultimate emptiness is as if a knife had wounded the heart. The treatise-author explains where this madness comes from: śrāvakas are attached to the śrāvaka Dharma; five hundred years after the Buddha’s passing they divided into five schools, each holding to its own Dharma and seeking a fixed mark of dharmas, not knowing that the Buddha taught the Dharma for the sake of liberation, and firmly attached to words; so when they hear prajñā say that all dharmas are ultimately empty, it is as if a knife had wounded the heart! They all say: a fixed dharma—how can it now be said not to exist? Within the mark of prajñā, where there is no attaining and no attachment, they make a mark of attaining and of attachment, and so they disparage and destroy it, saying it is not the Buddha’s teaching. This passage is the most piercing pathological dissection in the whole chapter: those who slander prajñā are not people who do not study the Buddha’s teaching, but people who have studied it too 「定」 tr. "fixed"—taking the verbal teaching the Buddha established for the sake of liberation and holding it as a fixed mark, then using the Buddha’s Dharma they hold to slander the mother of the Buddha’s Dharma. These three characters—knife, wound, heart—say everything about the pain, cutting to the skin, that one who is attached feels on first hearing the Dharma of emptiness; in pain and without reflection, it becomes the karma of slander.

7. One mark, the signless; wrong view gains strength, and the chain of destruction plays out again. The Buddha, out of pity for beings, speaks of the path and the non-path; now within prajñā the path and the non-path are wholly one mark, namely the signless. Those who hold to a fixed mark first give rise to doubt here, and afterwards, settling the mind on the Dharma of emptiness, give rise to wrong view; because wrong view gains strength, in the midst of the great assembly they everywhere destroy prajñā—and so they break the omniscience of the buddhas of the ten directions and the three times and the other merits of the buddhas; because the merits of the buddhas are broken, the Three Jewels are broken; because the Three Jewels are broken, the causes and conditions of worldly happiness, namely the right view of the world, are broken; when the right view of the world is broken, the causes and conditions of world-transcending happiness are broken—the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to omniscience of all kinds. This Dharma is the cause and condition of immeasurable and boundless merit; because one breaks it, one obtains immeasurable and boundless sin and undergoes immeasurable and boundless sorrow, suffering, and vexation. The treatise-author plays out the chain of the second sūtra section once again from its psychological source: doubt → wrong view → gaining strength → open destruction → the whole chain cut off together. The phrase 「於大眾中處處毀壞」 tr. "in the midst of the great assembly, everywhere destroys it" deserves attention—once wrong view gains strength, it must turn into teaching others; the heaviness of the karma of slander lies in how widely it spreads.

8. The four conditions explained at length, first: being driven by Māra, and the four Māras. The treatise-author poses a question: the causes and conditions of breaking the Dharma were already spoken of earlier in the treatise, so why does Subhūti ask again? The answer: before, it was spoken in the treatise; now it is spoken in the sūtra; before, it was not spoken in full; now it is spoken in full and at length. And so he explains the conditions one by one. As for being driven by Māra: Māra, or Māra’s people, come and enter a person’s mind and turn his body and speech, making him break prajñā. Thus with Ānanda: the Buddha asked three times, 「閻浮提樂，壽命亦樂」 tr. "Jambudvīpa is delightful, and life too is delightful", and because Māra had entered his body, three times he did not answer the Buddha—Ānanda had already attained the first path and was still harassed by Māra, how much more ordinary people! Again, Māra is of four kinds: the Māra of the five aggregates, the Māra of the afflictions, the Māra of death, and the Māra who is a son of the gods of the Sovereign heaven; among the four Māras it is mostly the Māra of the afflictions and the Māra who is a son of the gods of the Sovereign heaven that make people not have faith in prajñā; greedily attached to their own dharma, resentful and envious of the dharmas of others, deluded and inverted, they are therefore able to break prajñā. Someone says: the first cause and condition is the Māra of the afflictions, and the fourth is the Māra who is a son of the gods of the Sovereign heaven; because one is driven by these two Māras, it is called being driven by Māra. The example of Ānanda is the most sobering: even a noble one could not escape Māra entering his body—how can an ordinary person presume that he will not be turned by Māra?

9. The four conditions explained at length, second and third: not having faith in the deep Dharma, and keeping company with evil friends. As for not having faith in the deep Dharma: because one is firmly attached to wrong views, greedily loves one’s own dharma, and has dull faculties of wisdom, one does not recognise the Buddha’s intent, and because one neither believes nor accepts the very deep prajñā, one breaks it. As for keeping company with evil friends, the treatise-author distinguishes three grades of people: there are those whose faculties are sharp and fit for faith, and to whom Māra does not come, yet who break prajñā only because they follow the teaching of an evil teacher; there are those who, though they belong to an evil friend, have thin fetters and so are diligently vigorous and can have faith in prajñā; therefore two things must come together as one—both belonging to an evil friend, and also being deeply attached to the five aggregates, with thick fetters, giving rise to a lazy mind—and for this reason one does not have faith. This judgement of three grades has the finest sense of measure: a teacher’s wrongness need not ruin the disciple, and the disciple’s sharp faculties need not protect him either—only when outer condition and inner cause, the two things, come together does the root of slander take shape. From this the learner can know: choosing a teacher is certainly important, but treating one’s own fetters is more important still.

10. The four conditions explained at length, fourth: anger and arrogance. As for much practising anger and hatred, exalting oneself and despising others: such a person has, life after life, gathered much anger and hatred until it has become his nature—the mark of anger is precisely the mark of lack of faith; hard and stubborn and exalting himself, he despises those who expound the Dharma: 「我智德如是，尚不能解，況汝愚賤而能知之！」 tr. "With wisdom and virtue such as mine, I still cannot understand it—how much less could you, foolish and base, know it!" Because anger and arrogance are many, he breaks prajñā. This condition comes closest to the sickness of the learned: not understanding the deep Dharma, not reflecting on the dullness of their own faculties of wisdom, but instead, relying on their own wisdom and virtue, despising the one who expounds—and so slander of the Dharma issues from the arrogant mind. The sentence 「瞋相者是不信相」 tr. "the mark of anger is the mark of lack of faith" is the treatise-author’s discerning eye: anger and lack of faith share a single root; both are the mark of a mind that will not bow its head to receive the Dharma.

11. The people for whom it is hard to believe and hard to understand; the Buddha approves his words. Subhūti says to the Buddha: this prajñāpāramitā is hard to believe and hard to understand for people who are not diligently vigorous, who plant roots that are not good, and who keep company with evil companions! The Buddha repeats: Just so! Just so! And between question and answer the real question is forced out: in what way is this prajñā very deep, hard to believe and hard to understand? This one question is the pivot between the two halves of the Last Part—the first half speaks of the sin of slandering the Dharma and the marks of the slanderer; with this question it turns, and turns to the very Dharma that is slandered; the two great passages below, on neither bound nor released and on all dharmas being pure, both answer this 「云何甚深」 tr. "in what way is it very deep". The reason it is hard to believe lies not in the Dharma having anything dangerous or remote, but in its being deep and plain to the utmost—so deep that there is no mark to grasp, and shallow capacities, on the contrary, find nowhere to lay a hand.

12. Neither bound nor released, because of a nature without anything existent; the three limits likewise. The Buddha answers: form is neither bound nor released. Why? Because form is a nature without anything existent. Feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, the six perfections, inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to omniscience and omniscience of all kinds, are each neither bound nor released, each for the reason that that dharma is a nature without anything existent. It is further carried to the three limits: the original limit of form is neither bound nor released, for the original limit is a nature without anything existent, and this is form; the later limit and the present are likewise, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds, which in all three limits is neither bound nor released. The sūtra passes over all dharmas in the same sentence pattern dozens of times, precisely so that a person may meet, on each dharma, the same encounter in person: bondage and release are set up provisionally in dependence on each other; the substance of dharmas is without anything existent—on whom is bondage placed, on whom release? With one push through the three limits, even the temporal narrative of ‘once bound, now released’ is taken apart entirely—vertically exhausting the three limits and horizontally pervading all dharmas, there is not one place where someone who grasps at marks can set foot; this is the reality of its being very deep and hard to believe.

13. The people with seven marks truly find it hard to believe and understand; the Buddha adds 「繫屬於魔」 tr. "bound over to Māra". Subhūti further describes the marks of people who find it hard to believe: not diligently vigorous, not planting roots of goodness, keeping company with evil companions, lazy, of little progress, prone to forgetting, without skilful, expedient wisdom—such people truly find it hard to believe and hard to understand. The Buddha approves his words, but into the seven marks adds one phrase, 「繫屬於魔」 tr. "bound over to Māra". This addition corresponds exactly to the treatise-author’s question and answer below: Subhūti speaks directly of the inner and outer causes and conditions being incomplete; the Buddha speaks of them completely—beyond inner cause and outer condition there is also being bound over to Māra; a practitioner of the path, while examining himself for the seven marks, must not forget this further outer enemy. The sūtra then, with 「何以故」 tr. "Why?", brings out that because form is pure the result too is pure, and from here the Dharma that is hard to believe turns into the gate of purity.

14. Because form is pure, prajñā is pure; because the non-dual is pure, form is pure. The Buddha says: because form is pure, the result too is pure; because feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, are pure, the result too is pure. Again, because form is pure, prajñāpāramitā is pure; because prajñā is pure, form is pure; and so on up to: because omniscience of all kinds is pure, prajñā is pure—without duality and without difference, without cutting and without breaking. Again, because the non-dual is pure, form is pure, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds being pure; because self is pure, beings are pure, and so on up to the knower and the seer being pure, form is pure; because form is pure, self, beings, and so on up to the knower and the seer are pure—not two and not different, without cutting and without breaking. The three instances of 「復次」 tr. "Again" are three stages of advance: first it establishes that cause and result are both pure; next it establishes that what illuminates and what is illuminated purify each other; last it takes even the sixteen names of knowing and seeing—self, beings, and the rest—into purity. Purity is not a separate purity obtained after washing away defilement; it is that all dharmas, being a nature without anything existent, are pure of themselves; so purity has no this and that: to say that one dharma is pure is precisely to say that all dharmas are pure, and to say that all dharmas are pure is still only one purity—these words—without duality and without difference—are the heart of this passage.

15. The three poisons are bondage yet without self-nature; because bondage is empty, release too is empty. The treatise-author explains 「不縛不解」 tr. "neither bound nor released": the three poisons are bondage, the three gates of liberation are release; yet the three poisons and the other afflictions are deceptive and unreal, born from the coming together of causes and conditions, and without self-nature, so there is no bondage; since there is no bondage, there is no release; because the three poisons are broken, the three gates of liberation too are empty. Again, the inverted afflictions of grasping at marks and being attached to dharmas are bondage—if the dharma of bondage really and definitely had a self-nature, it could not be released; if it really and definitely existed, who could break it? If it were broken, one would fall into annihilation; if the afflictions are from the start deceptive and unreal, there is also nothing to cut off. Again, all minds and mental-factor dharmas—recollection, imagining, and discrimination, grasping at marks—are all bound within their objects; if one enters the real mark of all dharmas and knows all of them to be deceptive, then, as said in an earlier chapter, 「心清淨相者，即是非心相」 tr. "the mark of a pure mind is precisely not the mark of mind"—because bondage is empty, release too is empty. The three layers of explanation press in step by step: first they break the substance of bondage; next, with a dilemma, they break the real existence of bondage (if it really existed it could not be released; if it could be broken one would fall into annihilation); last, even the mind that binds is illuminated as empty. The crucial point is this: to say that bondage is empty is not to indulge the afflictions; it is precisely why the afflictions can be broken—only because they are deceptive can they be broken; if they really existed, they could not, on the contrary, be broken.

16. The Buddha himself states the causes and conditions; neither bound nor released in the three times. Here the Buddha himself states the causes and conditions: form and the other dharmas are conditioned, made dharmas, because they are born from the coming together of causes and conditions and because they have no fixed nature; so it says 「無所有性是色等諸法」 tr. "form and the other dharmas are a nature without anything existent". Again, form and the other dharmas are neither bound nor released in the three times, as said in the refutation of the three times. The treatise-author specially marks 「佛自說因緣」 tr. "the Buddha himself states the causes and conditions" so that a person will see clearly: a nature without anything existent is not a profound speculation that a treatise-master has deduced; it is a ground of reason that the sūtra itself provides—born from the coming together of causes and conditions, it is without self-nature; without self-nature, it is a nature without anything existent. The one phrase on the three times gathers the sūtra’s repeated chant of the original limit, the later limit, and the present into the meaning of refuting the three times, so that sūtra and treatise, before and after, are of one thread.

17. Neither very deep nor not very deep; to evil people prajñā is very deep and hard to understand. Having heard this far, Subhūti knows that prajñā is neither very deep nor not very deep—as a later chapter says: 「若謂般若波羅蜜甚深，則遠離般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "If one says that prajñāpāramitā is very deep, one is far removed from prajñāpāramitā." So he says to the Buddha: to evil people it is very deep and hard to understand, not to good people. This turn is extremely subtle: earlier the Buddha himself said that it is very deep and hard to believe; here it says instead that holding to its being very deep is being far removed from prajñā—very deep is a word of negation spoken to those who grasp at marks; it is not that prajñā itself has a mark of depth to be found; within a nature without anything existent, neither deep nor not deep can be established. So whether it is hard or not hard to understand lies wholly on the side of the person, not on the side of the Dharma: the Dharma has no depth or shallowness; people have sharp and dull, defiled and pure—「惡人以般若波羅蜜甚深難解」 tr. "to evil people prajñāpāramitā is very deep and hard to understand": the difficulty is the difficulty of evil people, not a difficulty of the Dharma.

18. The seven marks of evil people explained one by one; the Buddha speaks completely of the deeds of Māra. The treatise-author opens the seven marks one by one: not being in accord with prajñā and not being single-mindedly diligent and vigorous; not planting roots of goodness for understanding prajñā; following an evil teacher who destroys prajñā; the lazy, attached to worldly happiness and not wishing to leave the world; such people, if they have any vigour, have so little it is not worth mentioning; because afflictions disturb the mind, they are prone to forgetting; because the marks of wholesome and unwholesome dharmas are not broken, arrogance is not removed, and there is wrong view and idle discourse, they seek the real mark of all dharmas yet do not know how to distinguish the good and bad in the marks of dharmas—this is called being without skilful, expedient wisdom. Because they have such evil dharmas, they find the very deep prajñā hard to understand. He also poses a question: in Subhūti’s account there are no deeds of Māra, so why does the Buddha’s account add the deeds of Māra? The answer: Subhūti speaks directly of the inner and outer causes and conditions being incomplete; the Buddha now speaks of them completely, and so says 「是人為魔所使」 tr. "this person is driven by Māra". The definition of 「無巧便慧」 tr. "without skilful, expedient wisdom" at the end of the seven marks is the most worth savouring—it is not a lack of worldly intelligence; it is failing, within the gate of the real mark, to tell good from bad; if arrogance and wrong view are not removed, then however clever one is, within prajñā one is still without wisdom.

19. Because the result is pure, one knows that the cause too is pure. The Buddha, wishing further to speak of the mark of being very deep and hard to understand, tells Subhūti: because form and the other dharmas are pure, the result too is pure. The treatise-author explains: the four foundations of mindfulness are the result of form and the other dharmas—contemplating form and the rest as impure, impermanent, and so on, one obtains the foundation of mindfulness of the body, and the other foundations are as said above; the four foundations of mindfulness are by nature without outflows, cut off the afflictions, and are for the sake of nirvāṇa, and are therefore pure; seeing that the result is pure, one knows that the cause too is pure. The meaning of cause and result purifying each other is established from this: since the four foundations of mindfulness that contemplate are without outflows and pure, how could form and the rest that are contemplated alone be defiled? The result is born from the cause, and the place where the result is pure illuminates exactly the pure substance of the cause—this is saying the Dharma that is hard to believe over again from the gate of cause and result.

20. The contemplation of impurity is the first gate of entry and is not among the sixteen noble practices. The treatise-author raises an objection against himself: earlier it was said that by contemplating form as impure one obtains the foundation of mindfulness of the body; how then can it say that because the result is pure one knows that the cause too is pure? The answer: the contemplation of impurity is the first gate of entry, not a real contemplation, and so it is not among the sixteen noble practices; among the sixteen practices one contemplates impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and non-self, and does not contemplate impurity. Because of the inversion of purity lustful desire arises; to break purity it says 「不淨」 tr. "impure", but this is not real; so impurity is only a contemplation of resolved understanding. Within prajñā one does not contemplate permanence or impermanence, does not contemplate purity or impurity; where the contemplations of permanence and impermanence, purity and impurity, empty and real, and the rest cease, and idle discourse ceases, that is the real mark of form; the real mark of form is pure, and so the result too is pure. This answer sets the place of 「不淨」 tr. "impure" exactly right: the contemplation of impurity is a medicine that counteracts the inversion of purity, and the medicine is not the real mark; only where medicine and sickness are both dismissed and all contemplations and idle discourse have ceased is the real mark of form, pure. From this the learner can know: the purity that prajñā speaks of is neither the ordinary person’s inversion of purity nor the counteracting impurity, but the ultimate purity where all contemplations have ceased.

21. Prajñā is like space, ultimately pure; right contemplation, right practice, right cultivation. Again, the Buddha himself states the causes and conditions: prajñāpāramitā is like space, ultimately pure, without any defilement. Contemplating the real mark of form and the other dharmas as neither arising nor ceasing, practising the six perfections, cultivating the four foundations of mindfulness and the rest—in this way prajñā can be obtained; these are the three causes and conditions of prajñā: right contemplation, right practice, and right cultivation. So it says: because prajñā is pure, form and the rest are pure; because form and the rest are pure, prajñā is pure; form and the other dharmas and prajñā, within the real mark, are without duality and without difference, not different and not distinct, not apart and not scattered, and therefore not cut and not broken. The simile of space and the three causes and conditions are set side by side, and their deep intent is this: ultimate purity does not obstruct advancing in cultivation—though prajñā is like space, without defilement, it is still obtained by three roads: rightly contemplating the real mark, rightly practising the six perfections, and rightly cultivating the foundations of mindfulness; purity does not brush practice aside, and practice does not obstruct purity.

22. The dharma of self is a provisional name; all dharmas are likewise. Again, the dharma of self, sought throughout the ten directions and the three times, is unfindable; within the five aggregates there is only a provisional name; beings and so on up to the knower and the seer are likewise. Just as self is empty, without anything existent, and pure, so too are all dharmas. The treatise-author uses the dharma of self as the key to close the third treatise section: the emptiness of self is a meaning accepted in common by all the schools of the Buddha’s Dharma—seeking a self within the five aggregates, it is unfindable; there is only a provisional name; now, taking this commonly accepted emptiness as an example, he extends it to all dharmas—that dharmas are without anything existent and pure follows one and the same line of reason as the emptiness of self. Where the sūtra said earlier, ‘because self is pure and beings are pure, form is pure’, the reason lies precisely here: self is from the start empty and pure, so taking self as the example for dharmas, dharma after dharma is pure.

23. Because lust, hatred, and delusion are pure, form is pure, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds being pure. The fourth sūtra section advances to a further realm: because lust is pure, form is pure, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds being pure; lust being pure and form being pure, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds being pure, are not two and not different; because hatred and delusion are pure, form is pure, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds being pure, and these too are not two and not different. The three poisons are defiled dharmas that all the sūtras alike condemn, yet here it says lust, hatred, and delusion are pure—this is the sharpest sentence in the whole chapter, and precisely because it is sharp, the sūtra follows it at once with the words not two and not different to settle its meaning: it is not indulging the three poisons as pure conduct; it is illuminating that the nature of the three poisons is from the start empty and from the start pure; the marks of the poisons are deceptive, and the nature of the poisons is without anything existent—the same nature without anything existent as the purity of form and the purity of omniscience—and so they are not two and not different. The meaning of this sentence is only fully disclosed when the fourth treatise section says 「三毒實性清淨」 tr. "the real nature of the three poisons is pure"; at this point the reader should hold the doubt and wait for the treatise’s explanation, and not first make up an understanding of his own.

24. The twelve links purify one another link by link, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds being pure. Again: because ignorance is pure, the constructions are pure; because the constructions are pure, consciousness is pure; because consciousness is pure, name-and-form is pure; because name-and-form is pure, the six sense-fields are pure; because the six sense-fields are pure, contact is pure; because contact is pure, feeling is pure; because feeling is pure, craving is pure; because craving is pure, grasping is pure; because grasping is pure, existence is pure; because existence is pure, birth is pure; because birth is pure, old age and death are pure; because old age and death are pure, prajñā is pure; because prajñā is pure, and so on up to dānapāramitā is pure; because dāna is pure, inner emptiness is pure; because inner emptiness is pure, and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas is pure; because the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas is pure, the four foundations of mindfulness are pure; because the four foundations of mindfulness are pure, and so on up to omniscience is pure; because omniscience is pure, omniscience of all kinds is pure—not two and not different, without cutting and without breaking. The twelve links are the chain of the flowing on of birth and death, yet the sūtra passes the word pure down the chain link by link, and further, going beyond old age and death, enters straight into prajñā, the six perfections, the contemplations of emptiness, and the limbs of the path, reaching straight to omniscience of all kinds: the gate of flowing on and the gate of return to cessation, defiled dharmas and pure dharmas, are one and the same vein of purity upon the nature without anything existent. To speak of purity link by link is precisely to speak of emptiness link by link; not one link on the chain really exists, so not one link is not pure.

25. Because prajñā is pure, all dharmas are pure; because omniscience is pure, prajñā is pure; because the conditioned is pure, the unconditioned is pure; the three times purify one another. Again: because prajñā is pure, form is pure, and so on up to omniscience being pure, not two and not different; because dhyānapāramitā and so on up to dānapāramitā are pure, and so on up to omniscience is pure; because inner emptiness is pure and the four foundations of mindfulness are pure, and so on up to omniscience is pure. Again, because omniscience is pure, and so on up to prajñā is pure, each one as said before. Again, because the conditioned is pure, the unconditioned is pure—because the purity of the conditioned and the purity of the unconditioned are not two and not different, without cutting and without breaking. Again, because the past is pure, the future and the present are pure; because the future is pure, the past and the present are pure; because the present is pure, the past and the future are pure—because they are not two and not different, without cutting and without breaking. Here the fourth sūtra section draws the net of mutual purity to its widest: dharma and dharma purify one another, the position of cause and the position of result purify one another, the conditioned and the unconditioned purify one another, the three times purify one another—take any one dharma as the head, and the remaining dharmas all become pure along with it. The net of purity has no head and no tail; this is precisely the mark of the real mark’s non-duality.

26. The real nature of the three poisons is pure. The fourth treatise section first asks: the Buddha says the three poisons are defiled, filthy, and impure; how then does it say here that because lustful desire and the rest are pure, form and the rest are also pure? The answer: because the Buddha says the real nature of the three poisons is pure, form and the other dharmas are also pure; because the three poisons are pure and form and the rest are pure, they are not two and not different. The judgement of defiled and pure lies in the mark; the illumination of the real nature lies in the substance: to condemn the three poisons as defilement is to speak of the marks of their delusion and karma, from the gate of counteraction; to say that the three poisons are pure is to speak of their real nature—deceptive, without self-nature, ultimately empty. The two statements do not contradict each other: precisely because the real nature is pure from the start, the defiled marks can be removed; if the nature of the poisons really existed, they could never be purified. The doubt held in the earlier passage is resolved here.

27. Ignorance is ultimately empty; in turn, all are pure. The treatise-author continues the explanation: wishing to speak at length of the purity of the three poisons and of the causes and conditions of its result, it says that because ignorance is pure, the constructions too are pure. 「無明淨」 tr. "ignorance is pure" means that ignorance is ultimately empty, as said in the ten similes refuting ignorance; from the twelve links on up to omniscience of all kinds it is likewise. Because form and the rest, ignorance and the rest—all these dharmas—are pure, prajñā is pure; because prajñā is pure, the dhyānapāramitā practised by the bodhisattva, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds, are all pure. Again, because the eighteen emptinesses are used, form and the rest, on up to omniscience of all kinds, are empty; because omniscience of all kinds is empty, the eighteen emptinesses too are empty; omniscience of all kinds is not apart from the eighteen emptinesses, and the eighteen emptinesses are not apart from omniscience of all kinds, and so it says not two and not different—what is empty is precisely pure. Now, from form up to omniscience of all kinds, one dharma as head, each of the remaining dharmas as head, in turn all are pure. The sentence 「空者即是清淨」 tr. "what is empty is precisely pure" is the master key to the meaning of purity in the whole chapter: purity is not a separate dharma; it is simply another name for emptiness; emptiness can empty both subject and object, so purity pervades everything, each in turn the head, without obstruction.

28. The real mark of conditioned dharmas is precisely the unconditioned dharma. Again, because dharmas are many and without measure, it speaks briefly of the conditioned and the unconditioned. The real mark of conditioned dharmas is precisely the unconditioned dharma: one who knows pure conduct seeks within all dharmas for permanence, bliss, self, and purity and finds them unfindable; that they are unfindable—this is truly knowing conditioned dharmas; truly knowing unfindability is precisely the unconditioned dharma—and so it says that because conditioned dharmas are pure, the unconditioned dharma is pure. Again, through conditioned dharmas one knows the unconditioned dharma; the noble ones, having obtained this unconditioned dharma, speak of the marks of conditioned dharmas—and so it says that the conditioned and the unconditioned purify each other. The purity of the conditioned and the unconditioned is not two purities of equal standing, but the outside and inside of one real mark: right where the four virtues are sought in the conditioned and found unfindable, that is the unconditioned; the unconditioned is not outside the conditioned, and so the two purities are not two.

29. Because the three times are empty, the conditioned and the unconditioned are all empty; ultimately pure, like space. Conditioned dharmas are within the three times, and so it speaks of the three times purifying one another. Why is this so? The past, having broken apart, scattered, and ceased, is without anything existent, and therefore empty; the future, not yet arisen and not yet existent, is empty; since the two times do not exist, the present too does not exist—only when there is a before and an after does one know there is a present. Again, conditioned dharmas arise and cease moment by moment, and so have no time of abiding; since there is no time of abiding, there is no present time. Because the three times are empty, conditioned dharmas are empty; because conditioned dharmas are empty, the unconditioned dharma is empty. Emptiness is precisely ultimate purity, not broken and not destroyed, without idle discourse, like space. The treatise-author refutes the present by two roads (it is set up in dependence on before and after; moment by moment it has no abiding), grounds the purity of the three times in the emptiness of the three times, and then from the emptiness of the three times gathers in the emptiness of the conditioned and the unconditioned—the great net of mutual purity in the fourth sūtra section here returns entirely to one phrase, ‘ultimately pure, like space’.

30. Conclusion: because one breaks the Dharma treasury that is ultimately pure, one falls into the hells. Thus prajñāpāramitā is ultimately pure, the Dharma treasury of the buddhas of the three times; because one breaks the spoken words and written letters that can proclaim and show the real-mark prajñā, one falls into the hells. This sentence is the seam where the two halves of the whole chapter join: the first half speaks of the heaviness of the sin of slandering the Dharma, the second half of the utmost purity of prajñā—here they join into a single sentence of cause and result. Above all, see clearly 「能宣示實相般若言說文字」 tr. "the spoken words and written letters that can proclaim and show the real-mark prajñā": what is broken is only spoken words and written letters, yet these letters are where the ultimately pure real mark is lodged and how the Dharma treasury of the buddhas of the three times is handed down; to break what proclaims it is to cut off the gate by which beings enter the real mark, and so the sin reaches as far as falling into the hells. Purity and sin are not two chapters; they are facing toward and turning away from one Dharma.

31. Breaking prajñā is of two kinds. Question: One who does not have faith in prajñā falls into the hells, and one who has faith obtains buddhahood; if a person of the five heinous sins, of broken precepts, of wrong view, or of laziness has faith in this prajñā, can he become a buddha or not? And again, there are those who uphold the precepts and are vigorous yet do not have faith in prajñā—how is it that they fall into the hells? Answer: Breaking prajñā is of two kinds. First: what the Buddha’s mouth spoke, and the disciples recited, practised, and wrote down as scrolls of scripture, deluded people slander, saying: 「非是佛說！是魔、若魔民所作，亦是斷滅邪見人手筆，莊嚴口力者說。」 tr. "It is not spoken by the Buddha! It is made by Māra or by Māra’s people; it is also the handiwork of people of annihilationist wrong view, spoken by those who adorn the power of their mouths." Or they say that although it was spoken by the Buddha, others have added to it here and there. Second: there are those who, with an attached mind, discriminate and grasp at marks in expounding prajñā, speaking the Dharma of emptiness with the mouth while the mind is attached to existence. This question takes upholding the precepts and faith in the Dharma apart and sets them against each other precisely to show: conduct in the precepts is the wholesomeness of body and speech, while faith and slander are the direction of knowledge and view; once knowledge and view are wrong, the wholesomeness of body and speech is not enough to save oneself—the simile of the bitter seed of wrong view below answers exactly this.

32. The first breaking falls into the great hells; arguing with an attached mind is not called breaking. The one who breaks in the first way falls into the great hells, because he does not obtain the intent of the noble ones in speaking prajñā. The second breaking—arguing with an attached mind—is not called breaking prajñā. As when Devadatta drew blood from the Buddha’s body, and Jīvaka too drew blood from the Buddha’s body: though it is the same name, drawing blood, because the minds differed, one person gained sin and the other gained merit; as when an image of the Buddha is painted, and one person breaks it because the image is not good, and another breaks it out of an evil mind: because the minds are not the same, one person gains merit and the other gains sin—breaking prajñā is likewise. The judgement between the two kinds lies wholly in the mind and not in the traces: one who slanders it as not spoken by the Buddha cuts the root of the Dharma, and so falls into the great hells; one who speaks of emptiness with the mouth while the mind is attached to existence has an understanding not yet arrived, not the evil mind of slander, and so it is not called breaking. The same traces with different minds, sin and merit as far apart as heaven and earth—the two similes set side by side establish clearly the standard of the mind-ground by which the Buddha’s Dharma judges sin.

33. Grasping at marks with an attached mind, one gives rise to karma of speech and of body in disparagement. Again, there may be someone who breaks prajñā who, though not angry and not despising the Buddha, uses his own mind in recollection, imagining, and discrimination: this is a very deep Dharma, spoken by one who is omniscient; there ought to be a deep and wondrous Dharma in it—how can it say that all is empty? The Buddha taught the Dharma with an unattached mind for the sake of delivering beings; this person, because of grasping at marks with an attached mind, gives rise to karma of speech that disparages and destroys prajñā, and can give rise to karma of body, waving it away with the hand and rejecting it, pointing at it in disparagement and sending it away. This is a third face—one who reveres the Buddha and slanders the Dharma: he does not despise the Buddha; on the contrary, because he honours the Buddha he measures the Buddha by his own surmise—thinking that what an omniscient one spoke must contain some deep and wondrous Dharma that can be attained, and refusing to have faith in 「都空」 tr. "entirely empty". The root of the sickness is still grasping at marks with an attached mind: the Buddha spoke with an unattached mind, and he listens with an attached mind; once attachment enters the listening, words of reverence turn into words of slander. Slandering the Dharma need not carry a mark of anger; holding to one thought of 「應有深妙」 tr. "there ought to be something deep and wondrous", the waving of the hand and pointing in disparagement already follow upon it.

34. The two kinds of faith. Being the opposite of the two kinds of lack of faith, they are called the two kinds of faith: first, faith that knows the real meaning of prajñā, which obtains the result as it is spoken; second, faith in the words and letters of the scroll, which obtains little merit. Faith too has grades: one who has faith by knowing the real meaning has faith that reaches the meaning of being without anything existent and ultimately pure, and so the result is as it is spoken; one who has faith only in the letters reveres the volumes but has not reached their meaning, and has merit, but little. This judgement does not belittle faith in the letters—the letters are where the Dharma treasury is lodged, and faith in them has its own merit; it is only that faith must go the upward road: from faith in the letters entering into faith in the real meaning, one then obtains the full fruit of prajñā.

35. The sin of wrong view is heavy: the simile of the bitter seed. Because the sin of wrong view is heavy, although the karma of body and speech, such as upholding the precepts, is good, it all follows the evil mind of wrong view. As in the simile the Buddha himself spoke: 「如種苦種，雖復四大所成，皆作苦味。」 tr. "It is like planting a bitter seed: although it is formed of the four great elements, it all turns to a bitter taste." A person of wrong view is likewise: though he uphold the precepts and be vigorous, it all becomes evil dharmas; what is opposite to this is called right view. The simile of the bitter seed answers completely the earlier question, ‘how is it that those who uphold the precepts and are vigorous fall into the hells?’: since the nature of the seed is bitter, the richer the nourishment of the four great elements, the more the bitter taste is formed; since knowledge and view are wrong, the more diligent the power of precepts and practice, the more firmly the evil dharmas are fixed. The good of the gate of practice cannot stand by itself; it depends wholly on whether knowledge and view are right or wrong as its seed-nature—this is the meaning in the Buddha’s Dharma of right view standing at the head.

36. The difficulty for a person of the five heinous sins to have faith in prajñā; King Ajātaśatru’s sin removed and the prediction received. For a person of the five heinous sins, evil sin constantly covers the mind; he doubts the karmic results of this life and later lives—how much less could he have faith in the very deep prajñā? Even if he writes out scrolls of scripture and makes offerings hoping to escape his evil sin, he is very far from prajñā. Or there may be one who meets a good friend, was vigorous in former lives, and is foremost in merit and sharp wisdom, who has faith in prajñāpāramitā, and through pure causes and conditions can obtain the result as it is spoken—as King Ajātaśatru’s sin of killing his father, through the Buddha and Mañjuśrī as good friends, had its heavy sin removed, and he obtained the result of prajñā as it is spoken and received the prediction of the unsurpassed path. This answers the earlier question, ‘can a person of the five heinous sins who has faith in prajñā become a buddha or not?’: on the common road it is hard—heavy sin covers the mind, the root of faith is hard to give rise to, and the outward help of scrolls and offerings cannot accomplish the matter; yet the gate is not closed—when three conditions are complete, a good friend, goodness from former lives, and sharp wisdom, heavy sin can be removed and the prediction of the path can be received. The example of Ajātaśatru is set at the very end of the whole chapter, a single thread of great bright light left amid the stern severity of sin and retribution: the sin of slandering the Dharma is spoken of to its extreme, yet the gate of repentance and deliverance has never once been shut.

Do Not Misread

Do not misread ‘by gathering the karma of speech there is the heavy sin of breaking the Dharma’ as meaning that the karmas of body and mind are not involved. The sūtra states plainly that one should well guard the karma of body, speech, and mind, and the treatise-author further points out that the karma of mind is the root of the karma of speech—the karma of speech is singled out because the mark of the sin of slandering the Dharma appears in speech; its root is in the mind, and its helper is in the body (waving it away with the hand and rejecting it is precisely karma of body). If it is read as only needing to seal the mouth, one loses exactly the teaching that treats the root, 「先攝意業」 tr. "first guard the karma of mind".

Do not misread the śrāvakas’ attachment to the Dharma in ‘hearing of ultimate emptiness is as if a knife had wounded the heart’ as the sūtra condemning the śrāvaka vehicle. What is condemned is the sickness, after the Buddha’s passing, of the five schools each holding to its own Dharma, firmly attached to words, seeking a fixed mark—not the śrāvaka Dharma itself; not knowing that the Buddha taught the Dharma for the sake of liberation is the root of the sickness. The sickness of attachment to the Dharma is not confined to śrāvakas—whoever holds the verbal teaching established by the Buddha as a fixed mark is among them.

Do not misread ‘the purity of lust, hatred, and delusion’ as indulging the three poisons. The treatise-author explains clearly: because the real nature of the three poisons is pure, form and the rest are also pure—purity is spoken of with regard to the emptiness of the real nature, not with regard to the marks of delusion and karma. The Buddha says the three poisons are defiled, filthy, and impure, and here it says they are pure; each statement has its own gate: the gate of counteraction condemns their marks, the gate of the real mark illuminates their nature. If one holds to the purity of their nature and indulges in poisonous conduct, that is exactly the kind of speaking the Dharma of emptiness with the mouth while the mind is attached to existence.

Do not misread 「非甚深、非不甚深」 tr. "neither very deep nor not very deep" as overturning the Buddha’s own statement that it is very deep and hard to believe. The Buddha says it is very deep, speaking to capacities that grasp at marks and find it hard to believe; to say that holding to its being very deep is being far removed from prajñā is to block the grasping of a further mark of depth upon prajñā. A mark of depth is also a mark, and to grasp it is to lose it; the two statements do not contradict each other, and precisely show the substance of prajñā, apart from the four propositions.

Do not misread ‘arguing with an attached mind is not called breaking prajñā’ as meaning that speaking of emptiness with the mouth while the mind is attached to existence carries no fault to speak of. Not being called breaking means not entering the category of slandering the Dharma and falling into the great hells; it does not mean there is no sickness: people who grasp at marks with an attached mind are placed by the sūtra precisely in the current of the four causes and conditions of disparagement and destruction; and the third kind, who reveres the Buddha and slanders the Dharma, gives rise to karma of speech and body precisely from the attached thought of 「應有深妙」 tr. "there ought to be something deep and wondrous". Between not falling into the great hells and obtaining prajñā there still lies the whole sickness of the attached mind not yet broken.

Do not misread the example of King Ajātaśatru as meaning that sinful karma can be escaped by luck. The one whose heavy sin was removed had the power of the Buddha and of Mañjuśrī as good friends, together with the causes of vigour in former lives and of merit and sharp wisdom—only when the three conditions are complete is it obtained; the sūtra at the same time states plainly that the person of the five heinous sins on the common road has evil sin covering the mind, and that writing scrolls and making offerings is very far from prajñā. This example opens the gate of repentance, not the gate of luck.

Bearing on Practice

Take 「意業是口業之本」 tr. "the karma of mind is the root of the karma of speech" as the place to set one’s hand to guarding karma. In daily life, if one wishes not to slander and not to disparage, it lies not in forcibly restraining oneself at the moment of speaking, but in treating the mind at ordinary times: when doubt arises toward the deep Dharma, first ask oneself—is it the Dharma’s fault, or have my faculties of wisdom not yet reached it? If one doubts and knows to reflect on oneself, the doubt will not turn into wrong view; if wrong view is not established, the karma of speech of disparagement has nowhere to arise from.

Take the four causes and conditions as a mirror for examining oneself. Being driven by Māra, not having faith in the deep Dharma, keeping company with evil friends, anger and arrogance—the four conditions need not all be present; if one condition is in the mind, the root of slander already lies hidden. Above all, the sentence that the mark of anger is the mark of lack of faith can serve as a daily lesson: whenever a mind of anger, arrogance, and despising others arises, one should recognise that this mind shares a root with lack of faith, and is precisely the seed of breaking the Dharma.

Take 「不縛不解」 tr. "neither bound nor released" as the right contemplation when afflictions appear. When an affliction arises, contemplate this affliction as born from the coming together of causes and conditions, deceptive and without self-nature—without self-nature there is no bondage, and without bondage there is no need to seek a separate release. This contemplation is not indulging afflictions; it is precisely why afflictions can be broken: only because they are deceptive can they be broken. Bondage being empty, release too is empty, and subject and object are laid down together at both ends.

Take ‘because form is pure, prajñā is pure’ as the contemplation of purity in daily life. There is no need to look for a pure realm outside defiled dharmas: contemplate one dharma as a nature without anything existent, and that one dharma is pure; when one dharma is pure, in turn all dharmas are pure. The twelve links in the gate of flowing on, and the six perfections and limbs of the path in the gate of return to cessation, upon the same nature without anything existent, have not one link that is not pure—when the contemplation of purity is accomplished, daily life in the defiled land is nothing other than the pure Dharma-realm.

Take the two kinds of faith to test one’s own position of faith. Having faith in the words and letters of the scroll, revering, reading, and reciting it, is the first step of faith, with merit, but little; one should advance to seek to know the real meaning—giving rise to faith upon the meaning of being without anything existent and ultimately pure, one then obtains the result as it is spoken. In daily life one can ask oneself: is what I have faith in the scroll of prajñā, or the meaning of prajñā? Entering from the scroll into the meaning is the upward road this chapter points out to the faithful.

Take the simile of the bitter seed to check one’s own knowledge and view. The power of upholding the precepts and being vigorous depends wholly on whether knowledge and view are right or wrong as its seed-nature: plant a bitter seed, and whatever the four great elements nourish all turns to a bitter taste; if one’s view is wrong, whatever precepts and vigour cultivate all turns to evil dharmas. So before applying effort in the gate of practice, first set right one’s knowledge and view; once knowledge and view are right, the same precepts and vigour all become provisions for awakening.

Further Resonances

What the Last Part carries on from the First Part is a single line that goes from the marks of sin into the source of sin, and further turns over from the source of sin into the substance of purity. The First Part set up the full picture of the retribution for slandering the Dharma: to disparage prajñā is precisely to disparage the omniscience of the buddhas of the three times; because of the causes and conditions of the karma of breaking the Dharma, one falls for immeasurable koṭi of kalpas into the great hells, passing through the ten directions, and on obtaining a human body is still born blind, without a tongue, without ears, without hands, born into low and base families without the Buddha’s Dharma; the five heinous sins are not like it, the sin being so heavy that the Buddha will not tell the size of the body in which it is undergone, leaving only the words ‘enough to serve as a bright warning’ and the vow ‘I would rather lose body and life than ever break the Dharma’. The Last Part takes it up first from the source of sin: by gathering the karma of speech there is the heavy sin of breaking the Dharma, and the karma of mind is its root; the four causes and conditions of disparagement and slander—being driven by Māra, not having faith in the deep Dharma, keeping company with evil friends, anger and arrogance—dissect to the end the face of the 「愚癡人」 tr. "deluded person" of the First Part, and the passage on the śrāvakas’ attachment to the Dharma, where hearing of emptiness is as if a knife had wounded the heart, further moves the slanderer from outside the gate to inside the gate. Once the source of sin is clear, the sūtra turns and asks why the Dharma that is slandered is very deep and hard to believe: the answer lies in neither bound nor released, in a nature without anything existent—and from this it opens the great net of purity: because form is pure, prajñā is pure; lust, hatred, and delusion are pure; the twelve links are pure link by link; the conditioned and the unconditioned and the three times purify one another; the treatise-author threads it all on one key, 「空者即是清淨」 tr. "what is empty is precisely pure", and gathers it into ultimately pure, like space. The one sentence at the end joins the seam: prajñā is ultimately pure, the Dharma treasury of the buddhas of the three times, and because one breaks it one falls into the hells—the sin of the First Part and the purity of the Last Part were from the start facing toward and turning away from one Dharma: the purer the Dharma, the heavier the sin of slandering it; knowing the heaviness of the sin, one should give rise to faith precisely at the purity of the Dharma. And the passages on the two kinds of breaking prajñā, the two kinds of faith, the bitter seed of wrong view, and Ajātaśatru’s sin removed and prediction received, judge the standard of the mind-ground for the two roads of faith and slander down to the finest hair—sin and merit hang on the mind and not on the traces, the gate of practice hangs on view and not on marks; the stern severity of sin and retribution is spoken of to its extreme, yet the gate of repentance and deliverance has never once been shut. From the head of the chapter to its tail, the two words faith and slander are here fully weighed: slander arises from grasping at marks with an attached mind, and faith is born from knowing the real meaning; to leave the attachment of grasping at marks and enter the purity of being without anything existent is precisely to cross from the shore of slander and the hells to the shore of faith and becoming a buddha.

Further Resonances

The vein of meaning in the chapter "Faith and Slander" has something it inherits before it and something it opens after it. What it inherits is the preceding chapter, "Illumination": that chapter opens with Śāriputra and praises at length the honour of prajñā itself—「般若波羅蜜能照一切法，畢竟淨故」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā can illuminate all dharmas, because it is ultimately pure," and therefore 「應禮般若波羅蜜」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is to be worshipped"; the Buddha further seals its utmost himself: 「世尊即是般若波羅蜜，般若波羅蜜即是世尊」 tr. "the World-Honored One is prajñāpāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā is the World-Honored One," offerings to prajñā 「當如供養世尊」 tr. "should be as offerings to the World-Honored One," and among the five perfections prajñā is 「最上、第一、最妙、無上、無與等」 tr. "supreme, foremost, most wondrous, unsurpassed, and without equal." Since prajñā is not different from the World-Honored One, the merit of having faith in it and the sin of slandering it can no longer be reckoned by the gathering and dispersal of an ordinary scroll of a sūtra—this chapter follows precisely on this and sets up its tenet of raising faith and slander together: one who has faith in and understands prajñā, on seeing the scroll of the sūtra, at once gives rise to the thought 「如見佛」 tr. "as if seeing the Buddha," and his origin lies in making offerings to the buddhas of the ten directions; as for one who disparages prajñā, 「是人毀呰三世諸佛一切智，起破法業」 tr. "this person disparages the omniscience of the buddhas of the three times and gives rise to the karma of breaking the Dharma," and his sin, even set beside the five heinous sins, 「不應言相似」 tr. "should not be said to be similar." The preceding chapter lifts prajñā up to where it is equal with the Buddha; this chapter then weighs the single thought of faith and the single mouthful of slander raised toward this Dharma as just as heavy as those raised toward the Buddha. As for what it opens, the chapter's end already shows the first signs of it: in the Last Part of this chapter, the thorough probing of the causes of slander turns into the gate of purity—because lust, hatred, and delusion are pure, form is pure; the twelve links of dependent arising are pure link by link; the three times are pure through one another—and it is gathered into 「空即是畢竟清淨，不破不壞，無戲論，如虛空」 tr. "emptiness is ultimate purity, unbroken and undestroyed, without idle discourse, like space"; and the next chapter, "Praise of Purity," opens with Śāriputra stepping straight from this into praise—「世尊！是淨甚深！」 tr. "World-Honored One! This purity is very deep!" The Buddha says: 「畢竟淨故。」 tr. "Because it is ultimately pure." Asked by the purity of what dharma this purity is very deep, the Buddha answers 「色淨故，是淨甚深」 tr. "Because form is pure, this purity is very deep," and so on up to omniscience of all kinds. This chapter speaks of slander as arising from grasping at marks and of faith as established on nothing to be attained, and the place where it returns is ultimate purity itself; the next chapter then praises and examines this ultimate purity along its single course—and the vein of meaning flows on downward from this.

When later ancient masters read this chapter, what they preserved is richest on the matter of the chapter's name. The one whose approach is most complete, who composed a line-by-line commentary on the great sūtra that this treatise explains, heads this chapter 「信毀品第四十一」 tr. "Faith and Disparagement, Chapter Forty-One," the same as the chapter title of the great sūtra he explains, and differing by one character from 「信謗」 tr. "faith and slander" in this treatise's base text; explaining this chapter's name in advance at the end of his commentary on the preceding chapter, he says: 「信之者得無邊之福，毀之者得莫大之罪」 tr. "those who have faith in it gain boundless merit; those who disparage it gain the greatest of sins," and therefore it 「雙舉信毀稱歎般若」 tr. "raises faith and disparagement together in praise of prajñā"—that faith and disparagement set against each other are the eye of the chapter, the ancient master already states plainly. There is another ancient master, who once composed a commentary on this treatise itself; his work survives today in incomplete fascicles, and this chapter happens to be among what survives: both the table of contents and the heading of the main text follow the base text, reading 「釋信謗品第四十一」 tr. "Explaining Faith and Slander, Chapter Forty-One," while his own prose says 「第四十品者，名為泥梨品」 tr. "The fortieth chapter is named the Niraya chapter"—he both calls this chapter, by common usage, by the name of the hells, and calls it directly 「第四十」 tr. "the fortieth," one step off from the chapter order of the present text; this records it faithfully according to the actual state of the incomplete fascicles. His name 「泥梨」 tr. "Niraya" happens to match the variant chapter titles 「埿犁」 tr. "Niraya" and 「泥梨」 tr. "Niraya" found among the transmitted texts of this treatise, and the variant name noted in small interlinear script beneath the chapter title among the transmitted texts of the great sūtra—one chapter, and three names, Faith and Slander, Faith and Disparagement, and Niraya, set out side by side among the transmitted texts: some take the setting of faith against disparagement as the name, some take the result of falling into the hells as the name; all are recorded, without judgement. As for this chapter being cited in later ages: one treatise-master, in discussing the causes of uninterrupted karma, cites it by name, saying 「依泥梨品明之」 tr. "this is made clear on the basis of the Niraya chapter," raising this chapter precisely by its common name; and one who wrote a record on a book of calming and contemplation cites this chapter by name—「大品信謗品云」 tr. "The Faith and Slander chapter of the Larger Sūtra says"—summarising the words 「毀般若者即是毀訾三世諸佛」 tr. "one who disparages prajñā thereby disparages the buddhas of the three times" and 「無量億劫墮於地獄」 tr. "falls into the hells for immeasurable koṭi of kalpas," which correspond sentence by sentence to this chapter's passage on breaking the Dharma, falling into the hells, and being reborn in lowly families; elsewhere he further says 「具如前信謗品等」 tr. "fully as in the preceding Faith and Slander chapter and elsewhere," taking this chapter as a cross-reference for the meaning. All this records how widely it spread and what was actually cited, without judging higher or lower.

Bringing this whole line of further resonances back to this chapter, the divergence of chapter names that the ancient masters recorded shows precisely the wholeness of this chapter's meaning: to say 「信謗」 tr. "faith and slander," to say 「信毀」 tr. "faith and disparagement," takes the tenet of the two poles set against each other—the one who has faith comes from making offerings to the buddhas of the ten directions, the one who slanders goes toward 「從一大地獄至一大地獄」 tr. "from one great hell to another great hell"; to say 「泥梨」 tr. "Niraya" takes the severity of the result—later readers, looking at the chapter's name, know fear, and this is exactly the intent left behind when the Buddha granted Śāriputra's request that it be 「足為未來世作明誡」 tr. "enough to serve as a bright warning for future ages." And this chapter itself had long since gathered this setting-against into the judgement of a single mind: 「意業是口業之本」 tr. "the karma of mind is the root of the karma of speech"; with the same drawing of blood from the Buddha's body, yet 「一人得罪，一人得福」 tr. "one person gains sin, one person gains merit"; 「破般若有二種」 tr. "breaking prajñā is of two kinds": one who slanders it, saying 「非是佛說」 tr. "it is not spoken by the Buddha," falls into the great hells, while one who 「口說空法而心著有」 tr. "speaks the Dharma of emptiness with the mouth while the mind is attached to existence" is not called one who breaks it; faith likewise is of two kinds: 「知般若實義信，得如說果報」 tr. "faith that knows the real meaning of prajñā gains the result as spoken," while one who has faith in the written letters gains little merit. The sin lies not in the mouth but in wrong view and an evil mind, 「如種苦種，雖復四大所成，皆作苦味」 tr. "like planting a bitter seed: though it is made of the four great elements, it all turns to a bitter taste"; and yet even for the gravest of sins the road is not cut off, 「如阿闍世王殺父之罪，蒙佛、文殊師利善知識故，除其重罪」 tr. "as with King Ajātaśatru's sin of killing his father: because he had the Buddha and Mañjuśrī as good friends, his grave sin was removed," and he received the prediction of the unsurpassed path—speaking of sin, it speaks all the way to where there is no comparison; speaking of rescue, it likewise speaks all the way to where nothing is barred.

Therefore what the chapter "Faith and Slander" finally leaves behind is a way of asking that can be used again and again: when I hear a deep Dharma that does not fit my own understanding, is what arises the mind that doubts and seeks to understand, or the mind that, 「如刀傷心」 tr. "as if a knife had wounded the heart," clings to 「決定之法，今云何言無」 tr. "dharmas that are fixed—how can it now be said that they do not exist?" and gives rise to slander? When I expound the Dharma and discuss its meaning, do I speak knowing the real meaning of prajñā, or am I 「口說空法而心著有」 tr. "speaking the Dharma of emptiness with the mouth while the mind is attached to existence"? When I examine what I have faith in, does my faith rest in the scrolls of the sūtra, in words and written letters, or in the real mark of all dharmas, ultimately pure? When I see someone disparage the Dharma, I remember 「若有聽其言、信用其語，亦受如是苦」 tr. "if anyone listens to his words and trusts and uses his speech, he too will undergo such suffering," and do not follow him; when I fear my own former sins, I remember King Ajātaśatru's meeting with the good friend and do not despair. Answer these few questions well in every hearing of the Dharma, and the boundary between faith and slander lies not in another person's mouth, but in whether one's own single thought is attached or not—one would rather lose body and life than ever break the Dharma.