金剛般若波羅蜜經 分三 大乘正宗分
大乘的正脈，從一念發心起。佛還沒教布施、還沒說般若，先答須菩提「云何降伏其心」——教人把心擺正。怎麼擺正？把一切眾生都擔起來：卵生胎生、有色無色、有想無想，橫盡四生、竪窮三界，無一不在所度之內，「我皆令入無餘涅槃而滅度之」。可是話鋒陡然一翻：度盡了無量無數無邊的眾生，竟「實無眾生得滅度者」。要緊的是，所翻掉的，不是「有眾生可度」，而是那層「有個實在的我，在度一個實在的眾生」的妄執。於是佛點出全經第一個「即非」：心裡還存著我相、人相、眾生相、壽者相，就不算菩薩。用唯識的眼看，這四相正是把五蘊妄執成實我的遍計所執；遣掉它，無能度所度的我，這便是「我空」之門的起點。發心之大，與般若之無相，原是一件事——度盡眾生，而不見有一個我在度眾生；那擔起一切、又一無所執的人，才是真正的菩薩。
The true artery of the Great Vehicle begins with a single thought of rousing the mind. Before the Buddha teaches giving, before he speaks of prajñā, he first answers Subhūti's 「云何降伏其心」(how should one subdue the mind)—he teaches one how to set the mind straight. And how is it set straight? By taking up the whole burden of all living beings: born from egg, womb, moisture, or transformation, with form or without, with perception or without—across the four modes of birth and through the three realms, not one of them lies outside what is to be delivered, 「我皆令入無餘涅槃而滅度之」(I cause them all to enter complete nirvāṇa and so deliver them). And then the words suddenly turn: though beings beyond measure, number, and bound have been delivered, in truth 「實無眾生得滅度者」(there is in truth no being who is delivered). What matters is that what is overturned is not "there are beings to deliver," but that layer of deluded grasping—"there is a real self here, delivering a real being." So the Buddha sets out the sūtra's first 「即非」(is precisely not): if there still lingers in the mind a mark of self, mark of person, mark of being, mark of life-span, one is no bodhisattva. Seen with the Yogācāra eye, these four marks are exactly the wholly-imagined (遍計所執, parikalpita) that grasps the five aggregates as a real self; clear them away, and the self that delivers and the being delivered both fall—this is the threshold of the gate of "emptiness of self" (我空). The greatness of the rousing and the marklessness of prajñā are, from the start, one single thing: to deliver all beings, yet see no self delivering any being. The one who shoulders everything and yet grasps nothing at all is the true bodhisattva.
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 3 · The True Doctrine of the Great Vehicle · essence · Spring 2026
〔一〕菩薩這樣降伏其心：度盡四生三界一切眾生
經曰：
佛告須菩提：「諸菩薩摩訶薩應如是降伏 其心：『所有一切眾生之類，若卵生、若胎生、若 濕生、若化生，若有色、若無色，若有想、若無想、 若非有想非無想，我皆令入無餘涅槃而 滅度之。』
佛告訴須菩提：菩薩們應當這樣降伏自己的心——所有一切眾生，不論是卵生的、胎生的、濕生的、化生的，有形體的、沒有形體的，有心想的、沒有心想的、既不是有想也不是沒有想的，這一切眾生，我都要使他們進入究竟徹底的解脫，把他們度脫過去。
〔二〕度盡無量眾生，而實無一眾生得度
經曰：
如是滅度無量、無數、無邊眾生，實 無眾生得滅度者。
像這樣度脫了無量、無數、無邊的眾生，可是實際上，並沒有哪一個眾生是真被度脫的。
〔三〕有四相即非菩薩
經曰：
何以故？須菩提！若菩薩 有我相、人相、眾生相、壽者相，即非菩薩。
為什麼這樣說呢？須菩提，假如一個菩薩心裡還存著「我」的相、「人」的相、「眾生」的相、「壽者」的相，那他就不算是菩薩了。
〔1〕This is how a bodhisattva tames the mind: to liberate every being of the four births and three realms
The sūtra says:
佛告須菩提：「諸菩薩摩訶薩應如是降伏 其心：『所有一切眾生之類，若卵生、若胎生、若 濕生、若化生，若有色、若無色，若有想、若無想、 若非有想非無想，我皆令入無餘涅槃而 滅度之。』
The Buddha told Subhūti: bodhisattvas should tame their minds like this — every kind of living being there is, whether born from an egg, from a womb, from moisture, or by transformation; whether having form or without form; whether having perception, without perception, or neither having nor lacking perception — all these beings I will bring into final, complete liberation, and so deliver them across.
〔2〕Countless beings are liberated, yet in truth no being is liberated
The sūtra says:
如是滅度無量、無數、無邊眾生，實 無眾生得滅度者。
In this way measureless, countless, boundless beings are delivered across — and yet, in truth, there is not a single being that is delivered.
〔3〕With the four marks, one is no bodhisattva
The sūtra says:
何以故？須菩提！若菩薩 有我相、人相、眾生相、壽者相，即非菩薩。
Why is this said? Subhūti, if a bodhisattva still holds in mind the mark of a self, the mark of a person, the mark of a being, or the mark of a life-span, then he is no bodhisattva at all.
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 3 · The True Doctrine of the Great Vehicle · vernacular · Spring 2026
拿遍計所執、依他起、圓成實、我空、煩惱障，來照金剛經這發心一段的「即非·無得」。
本分的位：菩薩道的第一步——降伏其心
開經時須菩提問了兩句話：發心的人「云何應住、云何降伏其心」。佛先答了「應住」，到這一分才正答後一句「云何降伏其心」。古德都判：這是菩薩道的發端、發心之本——還沒教布施、還沒說般若，先教人把心擺正。無著《金剛般若論》把這一分判為十八住的第一住「發心」，又攝為「攝住處」；世親更以「四發心」（發心的四種德）統攝這一整段。所以這一分叫「大乘正宗」：大乘的正脈，從這一念發心起。
用唯識的眼看，全經的「破執」在這裡分出第一刀。眾生的迷執有兩重：一是把五蘊和合的身心當成實在的「我」，這是人我執，障礙解脫，叫煩惱障；二是把心所變的種種法當成心外實有，這是法我執，障礙成佛的遍知，叫所知障。金剛經前半破的是「我相」，遣的是人我執、煩惱障——這發心一段，正是這「我空」之門的起點。（到分十七起才轉破「法相」、遣所知障，那是後話。）
廣度四生三界：發心之「廣大」，緣生的眾生宛然可度
佛教菩薩這樣降伏其心：所有一切眾生——卵生、胎生、濕生、化生，有色、無色，有想、無想、非有想非無想——「我皆令入無餘涅槃而滅度之」。四生窮盡眾生的出生方式，三界（有色無色、有想無想等）竪窮眾生的所住之地：橫盡四生、竪窮三界，無一眾生不在所度之內。世親判這一句為發心的第一德「廣大心」（廣度一切），吉藏、智顗、窺基三家同此讀。
用唯識作鏡照這一句：所要度的眾生，都是依他起——依眾緣而生起的緣生之相（「依他」就是依靠眾多條件而有）。緣生的眾生宛然存在，可度、可入涅槃，這一層世俗不壞。發心之「廣大」，正建在「緣生的眾生宛然可度」之上——若連緣生的眾生都撥為無，便無可度，也就無從發心了。所以這一句先把「有眾生可度」立穩。
「實無眾生得滅度」：度而無度——破我相，顯我空
立穩「廣度」之後，經文陡然一翻：「如是滅度無量、無數、無邊眾生，實無眾生得滅度者。」度盡了無量無邊的眾生，可是實際上並沒有哪一個眾生是「被我度脫」的。正鋪張到極處（無量、無數、無邊），翻出一個「實無」——發心之「大」與般若之「無相」一時並舉。
這一翻，唯識看得很準。所翻掉的，不是「有眾生可度」（那是依他，宛然存在），而是「有一個實在的我、在實在地度一個實在的眾生」這層妄計——這層妄計就是遍計所執：把心所變現的影，當成心外實有的東西，又在這上頭安立一個能度的實我、所度的實眾生。「實無眾生得滅度」遣的正是這層遍計：度而不見有「我度眾生」之相，無能度的我、無所度的眾生實體可得。無著一句點得最透：「如菩薩自得涅槃，無別眾生」——若於眾生起「他想」、不作「自體想」，便不名菩薩；攝他同己，他度即我，己外無別實眾生可度。圓成這一支，也就隱在這「度而無度」裡：度盡而無一實眾生可滅（勝義無得），正是依他幻有不離圓成真實。
「有四相即非菩薩」：四相即遍計所執——遣我執，名菩薩
佛隨即收一句，點出全段的眼：「若菩薩有我相、人相、眾生相、壽者相，即非菩薩。」這是全經「即非」之式的初次現身——只是這裡還不是後文那「某法、即非某法、是名某法」的完整三句式（那要到分五、分八才現，到分十三密集連發）；此處只作「有四相即非菩薩」一句單標，單遣一層執。所遣的是什麼？正是「四相」。
用唯識照這「四相」：我相、人相、眾生相、壽者相，都是分別心在五蘊（色受想行識）上妄執出來的一個實在的「我」——這正是遍計所執的我執。窺基讀此句說：「若起我等四執，即分別之障未除，妄想以之更長，故是顛倒。」存著四相，就是煩惱障（分別我執）未除，妄想反更滋長，是顛倒。所以「即非菩薩」遣的，就是這層執實我的遍計：離了四相之執，無能度所度的實我，才契合無分別。發心而存「我在度眾生」之相，便落在顛倒裡，不名菩薩；發心而無四相，度而無度，方名真菩薩。
要緊的是看清「相」字。本分四「相」，羅什、流支作「相」，正取其為「所取之相」的意思（異譯如真諦、玄奘多作「想」，取「能取之分別」）。相也好、想也好，所指是同一件事：那層執五蘊為實我的遍計分別。後文分十七「破四相」轉到法位上去（由我空轉法空），這裡則純是發心位的「我空」——破的是執我為實的這一層。
四發心：發心非一句空話，是可住可滿的「住處」
把這一段合看，古德三家（三論吉藏、天台智顗、唯識窺基）異流而同歸——都以世親《金剛般若論》的「四發心」統攝它：廣度四生三界＝廣大心，皆令入無餘涅槃＝第一（最勝）心，滅度無量而實無眾生得滅度＝常（至極）心（攝一切眾生猶如自身、常不捨離），無四相＝不顛倒心（遠離身見、離分別執）。世親論偈一句收之：「利益深心住，此乘功德滿」——這四德不是四句空泛的口號，是發心可安住、可圓滿的「住處」。
唯識讀這四德，正見一條由淺入深的次第：先立「緣生眾生可度」（廣大，不壞依他），次以「無餘涅槃」為所向（第一，所求究竟），再以「攝他同己、度而無度」破能所對待（常，遣我他之分），終以「無四相」斷身見、離遍計（不顛倒，正破我執）。四德層層相銜，把一念發心，落成了一條可走的路。
唯識為鏡：同一發心，經語與論語
以唯識為鏡讀這一分，不是說唯識從金剛經流出——遍計所執、依他起、圓成實、二障二空之說，自有其經源（解深密、瑜伽），般若另是一系；而是同一「度而無度、無四相」的發心，金剛經以經語（即非·實無眾生得滅度）說，唯識以論語（遍計所執·我空·斷煩惱障）說，兩相對照，其義益顯。三十頌開卷「由假說我法」破實我實法，本分「破四相」正是破實我之發端；成唯識論說「我執·遍計所執」的我，即本分四相的論本技術語；心經「度一切苦厄」「無智亦無得」，也是度生而無能度所得——與本分「滅度眾生而實無眾生得滅度」同一無得之發心。一句收束：金剛經以經語說的「有四相即非菩薩」「實無眾生得滅度」，成唯識論以「遍計所執·我執·人無我」的技術語說的，是同一件遣我執、顯發心的事〔此一會通，釋慧鏡《從百法到金剛》（S5-P10）已明其旨〕。
Taking 遍計所執 (parikalpita), 依他起 (paratantra), 圓成實 (pariniṣpanna), the emptiness of self (我空), and 煩惱障 to reflect the “is-not / nothing-attained” of this passage where the mind is first given rise.
The Place of This Division: the First Step of the Bodhisattva Path — Subduing the Mind
At the opening Subhūti asked two questions: one who has given rise to the mind — 「云何應住、云何降伏其心」, how should he abide, and how subdue his mind. The Buddha first answered “how to abide,” and only in this division gives the frontal answer to the second, “how to subdue the mind.” The ancient masters all judge: this is the very inception of the bodhisattva path, the root of giving rise to the mind — before any teaching of giving, before any word of prajñā, one is first taught to set the mind straight. Asaṅga’s Vajra-prajñā treatise judges this division as the first of the eighteen abodes, “giving rise to the mind” (發心), and gathers it under the “abode of holding” (攝住處); Vasubandhu gathers the whole passage under the “four givings-rise-of-mind” (四發心, the four virtues of giving rise to the mind). Hence the title “the True Doctrine of the Great Vehicle”: the true vein of the Great Vehicle begins from this one thought of giving rise to the mind.
Seen through the Yogācāra eye, the whole sūtra’s “breaking of clinging” makes here its first cut. Beings’ deluded clinging has two layers: one is to take the body-and-mind, the conjunction of the five aggregates, for a real “self” — this is the clinging to a personal self (人我執), which obstructs liberation and is called the 煩惱障 (hindrance of defilement); the other is to take the various dharmas transformed by mind for things really existing outside the mind — this is the clinging to a dharma-self (法我執), which obstructs the omniscience of Buddhahood and is called the 所知障 (hindrance to the knowable). What the first half of the Diamond Sūtra breaks is the “mark of self,” and what it removes is the clinging to a personal self, the 煩惱障 — and this passage of giving rise to the mind is precisely the threshold of this gate of “emptiness of self.” (Only from Division 17 onward does it turn to break the “mark of dharmas” and remove the 所知障; that is for later.)
Delivering All Across the Four Births and Three Realms: the “Vastness” of Giving Rise to the Mind — the Dependently-Arisen Beings Are Vividly There to Be Delivered
The Buddha teaches the bodhisattva to subdue the mind thus: all beings whatsoever — born of egg, womb, moisture, or transformation; with form or without; with perception, without perception, or neither-with-nor-without perception — 「我皆令入無餘涅槃而滅度之」, I cause them all to enter remainderless nirvāṇa and so deliver them. The four births exhaust the modes of beings’ arising; the three realms (with-and-without-form, with-and-without-perception, and so on) exhaust vertically the grounds where beings abide: spanning the four births crosswise and the three realms lengthwise, not one being lies outside the scope of deliverance. Vasubandhu judges this line as the first virtue of giving rise to the mind, “the vast mind” (廣大心, the vast deliverance of all), and the three masters Jizang, Zhiyi, and Kuiji read it alike.
Take Yogācāra as a mirror to reflect this line: the beings to be delivered are all 依他起 (paratantra) — dependently-arisen marks born in reliance on conditions (“dependent on other” means depending on a manifold of conditions to be). The dependently-arisen beings vividly exist, can be delivered, can be brought into nirvāṇa — at this level the conventional is not destroyed. The “vastness” of giving rise to the mind is built precisely upon “the dependently-arisen beings being vividly there to be delivered” — for if even the dependently-arisen beings were dismissed as nonexistent, there would be none to deliver, and so no ground on which to give rise to the mind. So this line first sets firm that “there are beings to be delivered.”
“Yet in Truth No Being Is Delivered”: Delivering Yet Delivering None — Breaking the Mark of Self, Showing the Emptiness of Self
Having set firm the “vast deliverance,” the text abruptly turns: 「如是滅度無量、無數、無邊眾生，實無眾生得滅度者」, having delivered measureless, countless, boundless beings, in truth there is no being that is delivered. After delivering measureless and boundless beings, in fact there is not any single being “delivered by me.” At the very height of amplification (measureless, countless, boundless) a “in truth, none” is turned out — the “greatness” of giving rise to the mind and the “marklessness” of prajñā are held up at once.
This turn Yogācāra reads with precision. What is turned away is not “there are beings to be delivered” (that is other-dependent, vividly existing), but the deluded reckoning that “there is a real self, really delivering a real being” — and this deluded reckoning is exactly 遍計所執 (parikalpita): taking the reflection transformed by mind for a thing really existing outside the mind, and upon it setting up a real self that delivers and a real being that is delivered. 「實無眾生得滅度」 removes precisely this layer of the wholly-imagined: delivering yet seeing no mark of “I deliver beings,” with no self that delivers, no real substance of a being delivered to be attained. Asaṅga puts it most penetratingly: 「如菩薩自得涅槃，無別眾生」— if toward beings one gives rise to the thought of “other” and does not make the thought of “one’s own body,” one is not called a bodhisattva; gathering the other as oneself, the other’s deliverance is one’s own, and outside oneself there is no separate real being to deliver. The branch of 圓成實 too lies hidden in this “delivering yet delivering none”: to deliver all and yet have not one real being to extinguish (the non-attainment of the ultimate) is just the illusory existence of the other-dependent never apart from the real of the perfectly-accomplished.
“If There Are Four Marks, It Is Not a Bodhisattva”: the Four Marks Are 遍計所執 — Remove the Clinging to Self, and One Is Called a Bodhisattva
The Buddha at once gathers it in a line that points to the whole passage’s eye: 「若菩薩有我相、人相、眾生相、壽者相，即非菩薩」, if a bodhisattva has the mark of self, of person, of being, of life-span, he is not a bodhisattva. This is the first appearance of the sūtra’s “is-not” (即非) form — though here it is not yet the full three-phrase form of the later text, “some-dharma / is-not some-dharma / is named some-dharma” (which appears only at Divisions 5 and 8, and densely at Division 13); here it is the single statement “having four marks, not a bodhisattva,” removing a single layer of clinging. What is removed? Precisely the “four marks.”
Take Yogācāra to reflect these “four marks”: the mark of self, of person, of being, of life-span are, every one, a real “self” that the discriminating mind deludedly clings to upon the five aggregates (form, feeling, perception, formation, consciousness) — and this is exactly the clinging-to-self of 遍計所執. Kuiji reads this line: 「若起我等四執，即分別之障未除，妄想以之更長，故是顛倒」— if one gives rise to the four clingings of self and the rest, then the hindrance of discrimination is not yet removed, and deluded imagination grows the more by it, so it is perversion. To harbor the four marks is to leave the 煩惱障 (the discriminated clinging to self) unremoved, so that deluded imagination grows the more — this is perversion. So what “is not a bodhisattva” removes is just this layer of the wholly-imagined that clings to a real self: apart from the clinging to the four marks, with no real self that delivers or is delivered, one then accords with non-discrimination. To give rise to the mind yet harbor the mark “I am delivering beings” is to fall into perversion and is not called a bodhisattva; to give rise to the mind with no four marks, delivering yet delivering none — only so is one called a true bodhisattva.
What matters is to see clearly the word “mark” (相). The four “marks” of this division Kumārajīva and Bodhiruci render as 「相」, taking exactly the sense of “the grasped mark” (所取之相); the variant translations (such as Paramārtha and Xuanzang) mostly render 「想」, taking the sense of “the grasping discrimination” (能取之分別). Mark or thought, what is pointed to is one and the same thing: that layer of pervasive discrimination that clings to the five aggregates as a real self. The later Division 17, “breaking the four marks,” turns onto the dharma-plane (passing from the emptiness of self to the emptiness of dharmas); here it is purely the “emptiness of self” of the stage of giving rise to the mind — what is broken is the single layer that clings to self as real.
The Four Givings-Rise-of-Mind: Giving Rise to the Mind Is No Empty Word, but an “Abode” That Can Be Dwelt In and Fulfilled
Taking this passage as a whole, the three masters (Jizang of the Three Treatises, Zhiyi of Tiantai, Kuiji of Yogācāra) flow in different streams yet come home to one place — all gathering it under Vasubandhu’s “four givings-rise-of-mind” (四發心) from the Vajra-prajñā treatise: the vast deliverance across the four births and three realms is the vast mind (廣大心); causing all to enter remainderless nirvāṇa is the foremost (supreme) mind (第一(最勝)心); delivering the measureless yet in truth no being delivered is the constant (utmost) mind (常(至極)心, gathering all beings as one’s own body, never forsaking them); having no four marks is the unperverted mind (不顛倒心, far from the view of the body, apart from discriminated clinging). Vasubandhu’s treatise-verse gathers it in a line: 「利益深心住，此乘功德滿」— these four virtues are no four hollow slogans, but the “abode” in which giving rise to the mind can settle and be fulfilled.
Yogācāra reads these four virtues and sees precisely a sequence from shallow to deep: first it sets firm “the dependently-arisen beings can be delivered” (vast — not destroying the other-dependent); next it takes “remainderless nirvāṇa” as that toward which it heads (foremost — the ultimate sought); then by “gathering the other as oneself, delivering yet delivering none” it breaks the opposition of grasper-and-grasped (constant — removing the division of self and other); and finally by “having no four marks” it cuts off the view of the body and leaves the wholly-imagined (unperverted — the frontal breaking of the clinging to self). The four virtues link layer upon layer, settling one thought of giving rise to the mind into a path that can be walked.
Yogācāra as Mirror: the Same Giving-Rise-of-Mind, the Words of the Sūtra and the Words of the Treatise
Reading this division with Yogācāra as a mirror is not to say that Yogācāra flows out of the Diamond Sūtra — the teachings of 遍計所執, 依他起, 圓成實, the two hindrances and two emptinesses have their own scriptural source (the Saṃdhinirmocana, the Yogācārabhūmi); prajñā is another lineage. Rather, it is that the same giving-rise-of-mind of “delivering yet delivering none, having no four marks” the Diamond Sūtra states in the words of the sūtra (is-not · in truth no being is delivered), and Yogācāra states in the words of the treatise (遍計所執 · emptiness of self · cutting off the 煩惱障); set side by side, the meaning shows the clearer. The Thirty Verses open by breaking the real self and real dharmas with 「由假說我法」 (“by provisional speech of self and dharmas”), and this division’s “breaking the four marks” is just the inception of breaking the real self; what the Cheng weishi lun calls the self of “the clinging to self · 遍計所執” is the treatise’s technical term for the four marks of this division; the Heart Sūtra’s 「度一切苦厄」 and 「無智亦無得」 too are delivering beings yet with no power-of-deliverance attained — one and the same giving-rise-of-mind of non-attainment as this division’s “delivering beings yet in truth no being delivered.” To close in one line: what the Diamond Sūtra says in the words of the sūtra — 「有四相即非菩薩」 and 「實無眾生得滅度」 — and what the Cheng weishi lun says in the technical terms of “遍計所執 · clinging to self · the non-self of persons” are one and the same matter of removing the clinging to self and showing forth the giving-rise-of-mind 〔this rapprochement is already set out in Shi Huijing’s From the Hundred Dharmas to the Diamond (S5-P10)〕.
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 3 · The True Doctrine of the Great Vehicle · exposition · Spring 2026
考據Apparatus
一、科判定位（發心 · 加重）
| 科判系統 | 此分之位 |
|---|---|
| 昭明 32分 | 分三 大乘正宗分 |
| 釋慧鏡 §17 二分 | 前半（眾生空·破四相·煩惱障；發心之本） |
| 道安 三分 | 正宗分 · 初（發起後正示） |
| 無著十八住 T1510 | 第一住 發心（十八住「一、發心」[0757b06]；八住攝之為「攝住處」＝發心 [0758b27–c01]） |
| 世親 四發心 T1511/T1513 | 發心住於大乘之四種利益意樂：廣大·第一（最勝）·常（至極）·不顛倒（T1511 0781c23–28／T1513 0875a27–b03） |
| 吉藏（三論）T1699 | 「『所有一切眾生之類』下，此第二、正明發菩提心」[0101c22–c23]；用論偈四心釋之 |
| 智顗（天台）T1698 | 「今就誓願中有四心」[0077a20–a21]；橫亘四生、竪窮三界釋大心 |
| 窺基（唯識）T1700 | 依世親科「就初之中有四，初、明廣大心…」[0129c28–0130a01]；兼引無著十八住 |
發心義：此分佛答善現第二問「云何降伏其心」。古德三家（吉藏·智顗·窺基）俱以世親四發心（四種心／四利益意樂）統攝此一段經文——四生三界之廣度＝廣大心，入無餘涅槃＝第一（最勝）心，滅度無量無邊而實無眾生得滅度＝常（至極）心，無四相＝不顛倒心（見目四）。無著《金剛般若論》以發心為十八住之首、八住之「攝住處」（[0758b27–c01]）。此即菩薩道之發端：教未及布施、般若，先正其發心，故名「大乘正宗」。本分「即非」一式初現於「有四相即非菩薩」（見目三）。
二、異譯對勘（六漢譯 · 發心一段）
要句：降伏其心 / 四生 / 三界（有色無色·有想無想·非有想非無想）/ 無餘涅槃滅度 / 實無眾生得滅度 / 四相（想）即非菩薩
| 版本 | 發心一段（逐字節錄） | [出處] |
|---|---|---|
| 羅什 T235（原典） | 諸菩薩摩訶薩應如是降伏其心：所有一切眾生之類，若卵生、若胎生、若濕生、若化生，若有色、若無色，若有想、若無想、若非有想非無想，我皆令入無餘涅槃而滅度之。如是滅度無量、無數、無邊眾生，實無眾生得滅度者。何以故？須菩提！若菩薩有我相、人相、眾生相、壽者相，即非菩薩。 | 0749a05–a11 |
| 菩提流支 T236 | 諸菩薩生如是心：所有一切眾生，眾生所攝……我皆令入無餘涅槃而滅度之。如是滅度無量無邊眾生，實無眾生得滅度者。何以故？須菩提！若菩薩有眾生相，即非菩薩。何以故非？須菩提！若菩薩起眾生相、人相、壽者相，則不名菩薩。 | 0753a01–a08 |
| 真諦 T237 | ……應如是發心：所有一切眾生類攝……乃至眾生界，及假名說。如是眾生，我皆安置於無餘涅槃。如是涅槃無量眾生已，無一眾生被涅槃者。何以故？須菩提！若菩薩有眾生想，即不應說名為菩薩。何以故？須菩提！一切菩薩，無我想、眾生想、壽者想、受者想。 | 0762b01–b09 |
| 達摩笈多 T238 | 此，善實！菩薩乘發行，如是心發生應：所有……眾生攝攝已……彼我一切無受餘涅槃界滅度應。如是無量雖眾生滅度，無有一眾生滅度有。彼何所因？……菩薩摩訶薩眾生想轉，不彼菩薩摩訶薩名說應……若眾生想轉，壽想若、人想若轉。 | 0767a10–a18 |
| 玄奘 T220⑨ | 諸有發趣菩薩乘者，應當發起如是之心：所有諸有情，有情攝所攝……我當皆令於無餘依妙涅槃界而般涅槃，雖度如是無量有情令滅度已，而無有情得滅度者。何以故？善現！若諸菩薩摩訶薩有情想轉，不應說名菩薩摩訶薩……如是命者想、士夫想、補特伽羅想、意生想、摩納婆想、作者想、受者想轉，當知亦爾。 | 0980b01–b12 |
| 義淨 T239 | 若有發趣菩薩乘者，當生如是心：所有一切眾生之類……盡諸世界所有眾生，如是一切，我皆令入無餘涅槃而滅度之。雖令如是無量眾生證圓寂已，而無有一眾生入圓寂者。何以故？妙生！若菩薩有眾生想者，則不名菩薩。所以者何？由有我想、眾生想、壽者想、更求趣想故。 | 0772a12–a20 |
異文所繫：
- 「降伏其心」：唯羅什作「降伏其心」（答第二問）；流支作「生如是心」、真諦作「發心」、笈多作「心發生應」（梵序直譯之「心降伏應」見問句
[0767a04]）、玄奘作「攝伏其心」（問句[0980a29]）、義淨作「當生如是心」（攝伏其心問句[0772a11]）。降伏／攝伏之異，繫於菩薩「治心」之初門。 - 四相／四想：羅什、流支作相（我相·人相·眾生相·壽者相）；真諦、笈多、玄奘、義淨作想。真諦四想末作受者想（無「人」），義淨末作更求趣想（無「人」），玄奘擴為八想以上（有情·命者·士夫·補特伽羅·意生·摩納婆·作者·受者），笈多但三想（眾生·壽·人）。相（lakṣaṇa，所取之相）與想（saṃjñā，能取之分別）之別，正是後文「破四相」與唯識「分別所執」相通之文本指紋（見目三、目五）。
- 無餘涅槃·滅度：羅什「入無餘涅槃而滅度之」，義淨同（後句作「證圓寂／入圓寂」）；真諦作「安置於無餘涅槃／被涅槃者」（不用滅度）；玄奘作「無餘依妙涅槃界而般涅槃」（加「依·妙」，用般涅槃）。「無餘」一詞，古德判非小乘灰身滅智之無餘，乃大乘累盡德圓之無餘（吉藏
[0102a26–b01]、智顗[0077b03–b05]、窺基「涅槃有四」[0131a14]，見目四）。 - 無量·無數·無邊：羅什三詞俱（無量·無數·無邊）；流支但「無量無邊」（無「無數」）；真諦、義淨、玄奘但「無量」。窺基常心段引經作「無量無數無邊」
[0131a26–a27]，與羅什合。
三、即非・三性（眼 · 加重）
「若菩薩有我相、人相、眾生相、壽者相，即非菩薩」[0749a10–a11]——此分「即非」之初現。
本分尚無「X／即非X／是名X」之完式（完式初現於分五·分八，密集於分十三）；此處作「有四相即非菩薩」，乃遣遍計一支之單標：
- 四相（我·人·眾生·壽者）即遍計所執——分別心於五蘊上妄執實我（窺基：「若起我等四執，即分別之障未除，妄想以之更長，故是顛倒」
[0131b02–b03]）。 - 即非菩薩即遣此遍計——離四相之執，無能度所度之我，方契無分別。
- 圓成一支於本分以「實無眾生得滅度者」隱攝：度而無度相，即依他幻有（緣生眾生可度）不離圓成真實（無一眾生實可度）。
無四相＝不顛倒／無相：古德三家俱讀「無四相」為不顛倒心（見目四）——非顛倒妄執我相而度生，故「雖常度眾生，無眾生可度，名不顛倒」（吉藏 [0102b12–b13]）。此即由「我空」（破四相）顯般若無相之初門；後半（分十七起）轉「法空」（破四見），即非乃由眾生位施於法位（見分十七目三）。
即非映三性之讀，見釋慧鏡《即非三段式映射唯識三性》（S5-P01）；本分為其於發心位（破四相·我空）之一施。
四、諸家異釋（古德 · 世親四發心 · 加重）
核心 加重 ——世親《金剛般若論》四發心（四種心／四利益意樂）： 世親以四種發心統攝此一段經文，二漢譯並存，名異而義一，逐項錨於經文。
世親 T1511（菩提流支譯） 論偈 [0781c23–c24]：
「廣大第一常，其心不顛倒，利益深心住，此乘功德滿。」
四心名 [0781c28]：「何等為四種心？一、廣；二、第一；三、常；四、不顛倒。」逐項錨經：
- 廣心：「如經『諸菩薩生如是心，所有一切眾生眾生所攝……所有眾生界眾生所攝』故」
[0781c29–0782a02]（＝四生三界之總攝）。 - 第一心：「如經『我皆令〔住〕無餘涅槃而滅度之』故」
[0782a03–a04]（〔…〕＝世親釋引文作「住」〔大正底本，宋元明宮本作「入」〕，經本作「入」[0781c16]）。 - 常心：「如經『如是滅度無量無邊眾生，實無眾生得滅度者……若菩薩有眾生相即非菩薩』故。此義云何？菩薩取一切眾生猶如我身……如是取眾生如我身，常不捨離，是名常心利益。」
[0782a05–a11] - 不顛倒心：「如經『何以故非？……若菩薩起眾生相、人相、壽者相，則不名菩薩』故。此示現遠離依止身見眾生等相故。」
[0782a12–a14]
世親 T1513（義淨譯） 論頌 [0875a27–a28]：
「於心廣最勝，至極無顛倒，利益意樂處，此乘功德滿。」
四利益意樂名 [0875b02–b03]：「一、廣大；二、最勝；三、至極；四、無顛倒。」逐項錨經 [0875b03–b14]：「諸有發趣菩薩乘者，當生如是心」＝廣大；「我皆令入無餘涅槃而滅度之」＝最勝；「雖度如是無量眾生……不名菩薩」＝至極（「己身無別有情……攝為己體，即是至極不捨」）；「若菩薩有我想、眾生想、壽者想、更求趣想者，則不名菩薩」＝無顛倒（「由依有身見故我等想生，為令正斷是不顛倒」）。
〔二譯對位：廣／廣大 · 第一／最勝 · 常／至極 · 不顛倒／無顛倒——同一世親論之二漢譯，名異義一。〕
無著 T1510（達摩笈多譯）：此分為十八住之第一「發心」[0757b06]，八住攝之為「攝住處」者，謂發心[0758c01]。無著釋四生三界為「受生、依止、境界所攝」之差別[0759b27–c02]；釋「我皆令入涅槃」之願[0759c03–c16]；釋「無有眾生得涅槃」：「如菩薩自得涅槃，無別眾生……若菩薩於眾生所他想轉，非自體想，不名菩薩故」[0759c17–c25]。
吉藏（三論）T1699：「『所有一切眾生之類』下，此第二、正明發菩提心。論偈云『廣大第一常，其心不顛倒，利益深心住，此乘功德滿。』故用於四心釋此經文。」[0101c22–c26] 四生三界＝廣大心：「遍度三界六道，名廣大心」[0101c28]；「四生則一切攝故也」[0102a25–a26]。第一心＝無餘涅槃：「非灰身滅智，小乘無餘……無德不圓、無復餘德，故云無餘也」[0102a26–b01]。無四相＝不顛倒：「『若菩薩有我相』下，此第四明不顛倒心。雖常度眾生，無眾生可度，名不顛倒」[0102b11–b13]。
智顗（天台）T1698：「今就誓願中有四心，一、廣大，二、第一，三、常心，四、不顛倒。」[0077a20–a22] 大心＝橫亘四生竪窮三界：「釋大心者，橫亘四生，竪窮三界，四生是能住，三界為所在。依㲉謂卵，含藏曰胎，假潤稱濕，歘現名化」[0077a25–a28]。第一心＝大乘無餘：「大乘以累無不盡、德無不圓名為無餘」[0077b04–b05]。不顛倒：「『何以故』下，釋不顛倒，以失顯德……《大品》中具明十六……此中略明四耳」[0077b14–b20]。
窺基（唯識）T1700：依世親科「就初之中有四，初、明廣大心，次、明第一心，次、明常心，次、明不顛倒心，此初也。上依世親科。依無著者，就第三彼修行所住處中差別言之有十八」[0129c28–0130a02]。第一心＝涅槃有四：「涅槃有四，一、自性清淨……二、有餘依……三、無餘依……四、無住處……無邊眾生皆欲具得無餘涅槃，故名第一心也」[0131a13–a19]。常心：「此顯常心也。謂菩薩攝他同己，他度即我，己外無他，故能常度」[0131a27–a28]。不顛倒心＋四相界說：「此第四不顛倒心也……既無有四執，故名不顛倒心……故世親云，我者總觀三世五蘊差別執，見過去我相續至現在不斷名眾生相，見現在命根不斷住故名命者相，見命根斷滅過去後生六道名壽者相。然婆伽婆說，命者即是此名人相。無著稍不同也」[0131b01–b09]。
古德三家異流（三論·天台·唯識）於本分同歸世親四發心：發心之四德——廣（廣大）·第一（最勝）·常（至極）·不顛倒——逐項錨於四生三界·無餘涅槃·實無眾生·無四相。此即本分「發心」之古德定讀。
五、術語
菩薩摩訶薩 bodhisattva-mahāsattva（覺有情·大有情；無著釋「七種大」[0759b06–b08]）·
四生（卵·胎·濕·化 aṇḍaja · jarāyuja · saṃsvedaja · upapāduka；智顗「依㲉謂卵，含藏曰胎，假潤稱濕，歘現名化」[0077a26–a28]）·
三界九地（有色·無色＝欲色二界與空處；有想·無想·非有想非無想＝識處·不用處·最上天；智顗 [0077a28–a29]）·
無餘涅槃 nirupadhiśeṣa-nirvāṇa（玄奘作「無餘依妙涅槃界」[0980b06]；古德判非小乘灰身，乃大乘累盡德圓）·
滅度（般涅槃 parinirvāṇa；義淨作「證圓寂·入圓寂」[0772a17]）·
四相／四想（我·人·眾生·壽者 ātman · pudgala · sattva · jīva；相＝ lakṣaṇa 所取相，想＝ saṃjñā 能取分別；窺基引世親界說四相 [0131b04–b09]）。〔梵文發音輔助；四相之漢譯異名見目二（真諦「受者」·義淨「更求趣」·玄奘擴八）。〕
六、譬喻・修辭（發心無譬喻 · 修辭即廣度與翻轉）
本分無譬喻（虛空喻在分四·須彌山喻在分十）。修辭之要在廣度之鋪陳與翻轉：先以四生（卵胎濕化）、三界（有色無色·有想無想·非有想非無想）作窮盡式總攝（橫亘四生、竪窮三界，無一眾生不在所度），復以「無量、無數、無邊」極言其多——正極處陡然翻轉為「實無眾生得滅度者」。鋪張之廣與翻轉之空相形，發心之「大」與般若之「無相」一時並舉。此「全而即空」之修辭，即後文即非式之先聲。此目於發心分輕，於譬喻分（分四 虛空、分二十六 法身非相、分三十二 六喻）加重。
七、互讀
- 三十頌（T1586）：菩提心·二空·我執（v.1「由假說我法」破實我實法；本分破四相＝破實我之發端）；轉依（v.29）為發心終極所向。
- 攝大乘論（T1594）：入所知相·發心（菩薩道發端之論本）。
- 成唯識論（T1585）：我執·四相（遍計所執之我，即本分四相之論本技術語）；菩提心。
- 心經（T251）：「度一切苦厄」「無智亦無得」——度生而無能度所得，與本分「滅度眾生而實無眾生得滅度」同一無得之發心。
本分「有四相即非菩薩」，即三十頌、成唯識論「我執·遍計所執」之經語對應；「實無眾生得滅度」即心經「無得」之發心位。釋慧鏡命題「金剛經以經語說成唯識論以技術語說者」〔摘自《從百法到金剛》S5-P10〕。〔約定：只列實相關者，不强挂——系聯，非湊數。辯中邊論於本分無正面對位，從闕。〕
八、東西對觀（西方視角 · 對觀，非裁奪）
- 「度盡眾生而實無眾生得滅度」 ↔ 西方倫理學之「無我利他」弔詭（無自我之主體，何以行慈悲利他？）：西方多讀為一邏輯之兩難（既無我、無眾生，則「度生」失其對象）；唯識／古德讀為三性動轉——依他幻有故有眾生可度（世諦不壞），圓成真實故無眾生實滅（勝義無得），二諦不二，非兩難而是雙運。
- 「無四相」之無我度生 ↔ 西方康德式義務論之「無偏私」（道德行為須去除自利之私）：西方以「去私」為理性之自律；古德以「無四相」為不顛倒（斷身見、離分別執），非僅去私欲，乃轉依所證之無分別智。
- 窮盡式廣度（四生三界） ↔ 西方普遍主義倫理之「無遠近、一切眾生平等」：可對觀；然菩薩之「廣大心」根於「攝他同己，他度即我」（窺基
[0131a27–a28]），是自他不二之證，非僅理性推擴之普遍律。 - 對觀之要：西方傾向以「無我而慈悲」為待解之悖論；古德以四發心（廣大·第一·常·不顛倒）為修證之次第——發心非靜態之命題，乃可住可滿之「住處」（世親「利益深心住，此乘功德滿」）。悖論與住處之別，正是東西之一可注。
- （本目為西方視角之對觀；經與唯識讀法始終為主，西方為旁參，非裁奪義理。具體文獻屬研究者考索之事。）
九、校本定位
羅什 T0235 [0749a05–a11]（原典 · 大乘正宗分）。六譯本發心一段 [出處] 見目二：流支 T0236a [0753a01–a08] · 真諦 T0237 [0762b01–b09] · 笈多 T0238 [0767a10–a18] · 玄奘 T220⑨ [0980b01–b12] · 義淨 T0239 [0772a12–a20]。 科判／發心本：無著 T1510 [0757b06·0758b27–c01·0759b27–c25] · 世親 T1511 [0781c23–0782a14] · 世親 T1513 [0875a27–b14]。 古德：吉藏 T1699 [0101c22–0102b14] · 智顗 T1698 [0077a20–b20] · 窺基 T1700 [0129c28–0131b09]。
1 · Placement in the Sectioning Schemes (arousing the mind · weighted)
| Sectioning scheme | Placement of this division |
|---|---|
| Zhaoming 32 divisions | Division 3, The True Doctrine of the Great Vehicle |
| Shi Huijing §17 two-part | First half (the emptiness of beings · breaking the four marks · the affliction-hindrance; the root of arousing the mind) |
| Dao'an's three-part schema | The main teaching · the beginning (the proper showing after the arousing) |
| Asaṅga's eighteen abodes, T1510 | The first abode, arousing the mind (the eighteen abodes, “first, arousing the mind” [0757b06]; the eight abodes subsume it as “the abode of arousing” = arousing the mind [0758b27–c01]) |
| Vasubandhu's four arousings T1511/T1513 | The four kinds of beneficent intention in arousing the mind that abides in the Great Vehicle: vast · foremost (supreme) · constant (utmost) · undistorted (T1511 0781c23–28 / T1513 0875a27–b03) |
| Jizang (Three-Treatise) T1699 | 「『所有一切眾生之類』下，此第二、正明發菩提心」 [0101c22–c23]; glosses it by the treatise-verse's four minds |
| Zhiyi (Tiantai) T1698 | 「今就誓願中有四心」 [0077a20–a21]; glosses the great mind as spanning the four births and reaching through the three realms |
| Kuiji (Yogācāra) T1700 | following Vasubandhu's schema, 「就初之中有四，初、明廣大心…」 [0129c28–0130a01]; also cites Asaṅga's eighteen abodes |
Sense of arousing the mind: this division is the Buddha's answer to Subhūti's second question, “how should one subdue the mind.” The three ancient-master lineages (Jizang · Zhiyi · Kuiji) all subsume this one passage of sūtra text under Vasubandhu's four arousings of the mind (four minds / four kinds of beneficent intention) — the vast taking across the four births and three realms = the vast mind, entry into the nirvāṇa-without-remainder = the foremost (supreme) mind, liberating the measureless and boundless yet in truth no being attaining liberation = the constant (utmost) mind, no four marks = the undistorted mind (see register 4). Asaṅga's Vajracchedikā treatise takes arousing the mind as the first of the eighteen abodes, the “abode of arousing” among the eight ([0758b27–c01]). This is the very inception of the bodhisattva-path: before teaching even reaches giving or prajñā, one first rectifies one's arousing of the mind — hence the name “The True Doctrine of the Great Vehicle.” In this division the “is-not” formula first appears, in 「有四相即非菩薩」 (see register 3).
2 · Collation of the Variant Translations (six Chinese versions · the arousing-the-mind passage)
Key clauses: subduing the mind / the four births / the three realms (with-form, formless · with-perception, without-perception · neither-with-nor-without-perception) / liberation into the nirvāṇa-without-remainder / in truth no being attains liberation / the four marks (perceptions) is-not a bodhisattva
| Version | The arousing-the-mind passage (verbatim excerpt) | [loc] |
|---|---|---|
| Kumārajīva T235 (root) | 諸菩薩摩訶薩應如是降伏其心：所有一切眾生之類，若卵生、若胎生、若濕生、若化生，若有色、若無色，若有想、若無想、若非有想非無想，我皆令入無餘涅槃而滅度之。如是滅度無量、無數、無邊眾生，實無眾生得滅度者。何以故？須菩提！若菩薩有我相、人相、眾生相、壽者相，即非菩薩。 | 0749a05–a11 |
| Bodhiruci T236 | 諸菩薩生如是心：所有一切眾生，眾生所攝……我皆令入無餘涅槃而滅度之。如是滅度無量無邊眾生，實無眾生得滅度者。何以故？須菩提！若菩薩有眾生相，即非菩薩。何以故非？須菩提！若菩薩起眾生相、人相、壽者相，則不名菩薩。 | 0753a01–a08 |
| Paramārtha T237 | ……應如是發心：所有一切眾生類攝……乃至眾生界，及假名說。如是眾生，我皆安置於無餘涅槃。如是涅槃無量眾生已，無一眾生被涅槃者。何以故？須菩提！若菩薩有眾生想，即不應說名為菩薩。何以故？須菩提！一切菩薩，無我想、眾生想、壽者想、受者想。 | 0762b01–b09 |
| Dharmagupta T238 | 此，善實！菩薩乘發行，如是心發生應：所有……眾生攝攝已……彼我一切無受餘涅槃界滅度應。如是無量雖眾生滅度，無有一眾生滅度有。彼何所因？……菩薩摩訶薩眾生想轉，不彼菩薩摩訶薩名說應……若眾生想轉，壽想若、人想若轉。 | 0767a10–a18 |
| Xuanzang T220⑨ | 諸有發趣菩薩乘者，應當發起如是之心：所有諸有情，有情攝所攝……我當皆令於無餘依妙涅槃界而般涅槃，雖度如是無量有情令滅度已，而無有情得滅度者。何以故？善現！若諸菩薩摩訶薩有情想轉，不應說名菩薩摩訶薩……如是命者想、士夫想、補特伽羅想、意生想、摩納婆想、作者想、受者想轉，當知亦爾。 | 0980b01–b12 |
| Yijing T239 | 若有發趣菩薩乘者，當生如是心：所有一切眾生之類……盡諸世界所有眾生，如是一切，我皆令入無餘涅槃而滅度之。雖令如是無量眾生證圓寂已，而無有一眾生入圓寂者。何以故？妙生！若菩薩有眾生想者，則不名菩薩。所以者何？由有我想、眾生想、壽者想、更求趣想故。 | 0772a12–a20 |
What the variants turn on:
- “Subduing the mind”: Kumārajīva alone gives 「降伏其心」 (answering the second question); Bodhiruci gives 「生如是心」, Paramārtha 「發心」, Dharmagupta 「心發生應」 (the word-order calque “心降伏應” being in the question
[0767a04]), Xuanzang 「攝伏其心」 (in the question[0980a29]), Yijing 「當生如是心」 (in the taming-the-mind question[0772a11]). The divergence of subduing / taming turns on the bodhisattva's first gate of “treating the mind.” - Four marks / four perceptions: Kumārajīva and Bodhiruci give marks (self-mark · person-mark · being-mark · life-span-mark); Paramārtha, Dharmagupta, Xuanzang, Yijing give perceptions. Paramārtha's fourth perception ends with 受者想 (no “person”), Yijing's ends with 更求趣想 (no “person”), Xuanzang expands to eight or more perceptions (sentient-being · life-holder · man · pudgala · mind-born · māṇava · agent · receiver), Dharmagupta gives only three perceptions (being · life-span · person). The split between mark (lakṣaṇa, the grasped mark) and perception (saṃjñā, the grasping discrimination) is just the textual fingerprint by which the later “breaking of the four marks” connects with the Yogācāra “the discriminated-and-clung-to” (see registers 3 and 5).
- Nirvāṇa-without-remainder · liberation: Kumārajīva 「入無餘涅槃而滅度之」, Yijing the same (the later clause as 「證圓寂／入圓寂」); Paramārtha 「安置於無餘涅槃／被涅槃者」 (without “liberation”); Xuanzang 「無餘依妙涅槃界而般涅槃」 (adding “with-basis · wondrous,” using parinirvāṇa). The term “without-remainder,” the ancient masters judge, is not the Hīnayāna without-remainder of ashing the body and extinguishing cognition, but the Mahāyāna without-remainder of exhausted defilement and perfected virtue (Jizang
[0102a26–b01], Zhiyi[0077b03–b05], Kuiji “nirvāṇa is fourfold”[0131a14]; see register 4). - Measureless · numberless · boundless: Kumārajīva has all three terms (measureless · numberless · boundless); Bodhiruci has only “measureless and boundless” (no “numberless”); Paramārtha, Yijing, Xuanzang have only “measureless.” Kuiji, in the constant-mind segment, cites the sūtra as 「無量無數無邊」
[0131a26–a27], agreeing with Kumārajīva.
3 · “Is-Not” and the Three Natures (the eye · weighted)
「若菩薩有我相、人相、眾生相、壽者相，即非菩薩」 [0749a10–a11] — this division's first appearance of the “is-not.”
This division does not yet have the full “X / is-not-X / is called X” formula (the full form first appears in divisions 5 and 8, and densely in division 13); here it gives “having the four marks is-not a bodhisattva,” a single mark of the dispelling-of-the-imagined branch:
- The four marks (self · person · being · life-span) are the wholly-imagined (parikalpita) — the discriminating mind falsely grasping a real self upon the five aggregates (Kuiji: 「若起我等四執，即分別之障未除，妄想以之更長，故是顛倒」
[0131b02–b03]). - Is-not a bodhisattva is the dispelling of this wholly-imagined nature — apart from clinging to the four marks, with no self that takes-across-and-is-taken-across, one then accords with the non-discriminating.
- The perfectly-accomplished branch is, in this division, implicitly subsumed under 「實無眾生得滅度者」: liberating yet without a mark of liberation — the other-dependent illusory-existent (beings born of conditions can be liberated) not apart from the perfectly-accomplished true reality (no single being can really be liberated).
No four marks = undistorted / markless: the three ancient-master lineages all read “no four marks” as the undistorted mind (see register 4) — not distortedly grasping a self-mark in liberating beings, hence “though one constantly liberates beings, there is no being to be liberated, this is called undistorted” (Jizang [0102b12–b13]). This is the first gate by which, from “the emptiness of self” (breaking the four marks), prajñā's marklessness is shown; the latter half (from division 17 on) turns to “the emptiness of dharmas” (breaking the four views), the is-not then applied from the position of beings to the position of dharmas (see division 17, register 3).
The reading of the is-not as mapping the three natures: see Shi Huijing's The Mapping of the Threefold Is-Not Formula onto the Yogācāra Three Natures (S5-P01); this division is one application of it at the position of arousing the mind (breaking the four marks · the emptiness of self).
4 · Variant Readings of the Ancient Masters (Vasubandhu's four arousings of the mind · weighted)
Core, weighted — Vasubandhu's Vajracchedikā treatise four arousings of the mind (four minds / four kinds of beneficent intention): Vasubandhu subsumes this one passage of sūtra text under four kinds of arousing the mind, preserved in two Chinese translations, different names with one sense, each anchored to the sūtra text.
Vasubandhu T1511 (Bodhiruci's translation) the treatise-verse [0781c23–c24]:
「廣大第一常，其心不顛倒，利益深心住，此乘功德滿。」
The four minds named [0781c28]: 「何等為四種心？一、廣；二、第一；三、常；四、不顛倒。」 Each anchored to the sūtra:
- The vast mind: 「如經『諸菩薩生如是心，所有一切眾生眾生所攝……所有眾生界眾生所攝』故」
[0781c29–0782a02](= the total embracing of the four births and three realms). - The foremost mind: 「如經『我皆令〔住〕無餘涅槃而滅度之』故」
[0782a03–a04](〔…〕 = Vasubandhu's gloss-citation reads “住” 〔the Taishō base text; the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace editions read “入”〕; the sūtra text reads “入”[0781c16]). - The constant mind: 「如經『如是滅度無量無邊眾生，實無眾生得滅度者……若菩薩有眾生相即非菩薩』故。此義云何？菩薩取一切眾生猶如我身……如是取眾生如我身，常不捨離，是名常心利益。」
[0782a05–a11] - The undistorted mind: 「如經『何以故非？……若菩薩起眾生相、人相、壽者相，則不名菩薩』故。此示現遠離依止身見眾生等相故。」
[0782a12–a14]
Vasubandhu T1513 (Yijing's translation) the treatise-stanza [0875a27–a28]:
「於心廣最勝，至極無顛倒，利益意樂處，此乘功德滿。」
The four kinds of beneficent intention named [0875b02–b03]: 「一、廣大；二、最勝；三、至極；四、無顛倒。」 Each anchored to the sūtra [0875b03–b14]: 「諸有發趣菩薩乘者，當生如是心」 = vast; 「我皆令入無餘涅槃而滅度之」 = supreme; 「雖度如是無量眾生……不名菩薩」 = utmost (「己身無別有情……攝為己體，即是至極不捨」); 「若菩薩有我想、眾生想、壽者想、更求趣想者，則不名菩薩」 = undistorted (「由依有身見故我等想生，為令正斷是不顛倒」).
〔Cross-correspondence of the two translations: vast / vast · foremost / supreme · constant / utmost · undistorted / undistorted — two Chinese renderings of the same Vasubandhu treatise, different names, one sense.〕
Asaṅga T1510 (Dharmagupta's translation): this division is the first “arousing the mind” of the eighteen abodes [0757b06], which the eight abodes subsume as 「攝住處」者，謂發心 [0758c01]. Asaṅga glosses the four births and three realms as the distinctions of “what is subsumed by birth, support, and object-realm” [0759b27–c02]; glosses the vow of 「我皆令入涅槃」 [0759c03–c16]; glosses 「無有眾生得涅槃」: 「如菩薩自得涅槃，無別眾生……若菩薩於眾生所他想轉，非自體想，不名菩薩故」 [0759c17–c25].
Jizang (Three-Treatise) T1699: 「『所有一切眾生之類』下，此第二、正明發菩提心。論偈云『廣大第一常，其心不顛倒，利益深心住，此乘功德滿。』故用於四心釋此經文。」 [0101c22–c26] The four births and three realms = the vast mind: 「遍度三界六道，名廣大心」 [0101c28]; 「四生則一切攝故也」 [0102a25–a26]. The foremost mind = nirvāṇa-without-remainder: 「非灰身滅智，小乘無餘……無德不圓、無復餘德，故云無餘也」 [0102a26–b01]. No four marks = undistorted: 「『若菩薩有我相』下，此第四明不顛倒心。雖常度眾生，無眾生可度，名不顛倒」 [0102b11–b13].
Zhiyi (Tiantai) T1698: 「今就誓願中有四心，一、廣大，二、第一，三、常心，四、不顛倒。」 [0077a20–a22] The great mind = spanning the four births and reaching through the three realms: 「釋大心者，橫亘四生，竪窮三界，四生是能住，三界為所在。依㲉謂卵，含藏曰胎，假潤稱濕，歘現名化」 [0077a25–a28]. The foremost mind = the Mahāyāna without-remainder: 「大乘以累無不盡、德無不圓名為無餘」 [0077b04–b05]. Undistorted: 「『何以故』下，釋不顛倒，以失顯德……《大品》中具明十六……此中略明四耳」 [0077b14–b20].
Kuiji (Yogācāra) T1700: following Vasubandhu's schema, 「就初之中有四，初、明廣大心，次、明第一心，次、明常心，次、明不顛倒心，此初也。上依世親科。依無著者，就第三彼修行所住處中差別言之有十八」 [0129c28–0130a02]. The foremost mind = nirvāṇa is fourfold: 「涅槃有四，一、自性清淨……二、有餘依……三、無餘依……四、無住處……無邊眾生皆欲具得無餘涅槃，故名第一心也」 [0131a13–a19]. The constant mind: 「此顯常心也。謂菩薩攝他同己，他度即我，己外無他，故能常度」 [0131a27–a28]. The undistorted mind and the definition of the four marks: 「此第四不顛倒心也……既無有四執，故名不顛倒心……故世親云，我者總觀三世五蘊差別執，見過去我相續至現在不斷名眾生相，見現在命根不斷住故名命者相，見命根斷滅過去後生六道名壽者相。然婆伽婆說，命者即是此名人相。無著稍不同也」 [0131b01–b09].
The three ancient-master streams (Three-Treatise · Tiantai · Yogācāra) on this division come alike to Vasubandhu's four arousings of the mind: the four virtues of arousing the mind — vast (vast) · foremost (supreme) · constant (utmost) · undistorted — each anchored to the four births and three realms · the nirvāṇa-without-remainder · the truth of no being · the no four marks. This is the settled ancient-master reading of this division's “arousing the mind.”
5 · Terminology
菩薩摩訶薩 bodhisattva-mahāsattva (awakening-being · great being; Asaṅga glosses the “seven kinds of greatness” [0759b06–b08]) ·
四生 (the four births: egg-born · womb-born · moisture-born · transformation-born aṇḍaja · jarāyuja · saṃsvedaja · upapāduka; Zhiyi 「依㲉謂卵，含藏曰胎，假潤稱濕，歘現名化」 [0077a26–a28]) ·
三界九地 (the three realms and nine grounds: with-form · formless = the desire and form realms and the sphere of space; with-perception · without-perception · neither-with-nor-without = the spheres of consciousness, nothingness, and the highest heaven; Zhiyi [0077a28–a29]) ·
無餘涅槃 nirupadhiśeṣa-nirvāṇa (Xuanzang gives 「無餘依妙涅槃界」 [0980b06]; the ancient masters judge it not the Hīnayāna ashing of the body but the Mahāyāna exhausted-defilement-and-perfected-virtue) ·
滅度 (parinirvāṇa parinirvāṇa; Yijing gives 「證圓寂·入圓寂」 [0772a17]) ·
四相／四想 (self · person · being · life-span ātman · pudgala · sattva · jīva; mark = lakṣaṇa the grasped mark, perception = saṃjñā the grasping discrimination; Kuiji cites Vasubandhu's definition of the four marks [0131b04–b09]). 〔Sanskrit as a pronunciation aid; for the rendering variant-names of the four marks, see register 2 (Paramārtha's “受者” · Yijing's “更求趣” · Xuanzang's expansion to eight).〕
6 · Simile and Rhetoric (arousing the mind has no simile · the rhetoric is the vast liberating and the reversal)
This division has no simile (the empty-space simile is in division 4 · the Mount Sumeru simile in division 10). The point of the rhetoric lies in the laying-out of vast liberating and the reversal: first, with the four births (egg, womb, moisture, transformation) and the three realms (with-form, formless · with-perception, without-perception · neither-with-nor-without), an exhaustive total embracing (spanning the four births, reaching through the three realms, no single being outside the liberated), and then, with “measureless, numberless, boundless,” the utmost statement of their multitude — and just at the height of multiplicity it abruptly reverses into 「實無眾生得滅度者」. The vastness of the laying-out and the emptiness of the reversal set off one another; the “greatness” of arousing the mind and the “marklessness” of prajñā are upheld at one stroke. This rhetoric of “whole, yet just-empty” is the forerunner of the later is-not formula. This register is light in the arousing-the-mind division, and weighted in the simile divisions (division 4 empty space, division 26 the Dharma-body is not a form, division 32 the six similes).
7 · Cross-Reading
- Thirty Verses (T1586): the awakening-mind · the two emptinesses · self-clinging (v.1 「由假說我法」 breaks the real self and real dharmas; this division's breaking of the four marks = the inception of breaking the real self); the transformation of the basis (v.29) is the ultimate orientation of arousing the mind.
- Mahāyāna-saṃgraha (T1594): entering the character of the knowable · arousing the mind (the treatise-basis of the bodhisattva-path's inception).
- Cheng weishi lun (T1585): self-clinging · the four marks (the wholly-imagined self, i.e. the treatise's technical-language basis of this division's four marks); the awakening-mind.
- Heart Sūtra (T251): 「度一切苦厄」 「無智亦無得」 — liberating beings yet with no liberator and nothing attained, the same no-attainment arousing of the mind as this division's “liberating beings yet in truth no being attains liberation.”
This division's 「有四相即非菩薩」 is the sūtra-language correspondence of the Thirty Verses' and Cheng weishi lun's “self-clinging · the wholly-imagined”; 「實無眾生得滅度」 is the Heart Sūtra's “no-attainment” at the position of arousing the mind. Shi Huijing's thesis, “the Diamond Sūtra says in sūtra-language what the Cheng weishi lun says in technical language” 〔drawn from From the Hundred Dharmas to the Diamond, S5-P10〕. 〔Convention: list only what is genuinely pertinent; no forced pegging — linkage, not padding. The Madhyānta-vibhāga has no frontal correspondence on this division, and is left out.〕
8 · East–West Observation (Western perspective · observation, not adjudication)
- “Liberating beings to the last, yet in truth no being attains liberation” ↔ the paradox of “selfless altruism” in Western ethics (if there is no self and no being, how can one practice compassionate altruism?): the West mostly reads it as a logical dilemma (with no self and no being, “liberating beings” loses its object); Yogācāra / the ancient masters read it as the dynamic turning of the three natures — by the other-dependent illusory-existent there are beings to be liberated (the conventional truth unbroken), by the perfectly-accomplished true reality no being is really liberated (the ultimate truth nothing-attained), the two truths not-two, not a dilemma but a co-running.
- The selfless liberating of beings in “no four marks” ↔ the Kantian deontology of “impartiality” in the West (the moral act must remove the private aim of self-interest): the West takes “removing the private” as the autonomy of reason; the ancient masters take “no four marks” as undistorted (cutting the view-of-self, leaving discriminating clinging), not merely removing private desire but the non-discriminating wisdom realized in the transformation of the basis.
- Exhaustive vast liberating (the four births and three realms) ↔ the “no near or far, all beings equal” of Western universalist ethics: this may be set side by side; yet the bodhisattva's “vast mind” is rooted in “drawing the other in as oneself, the other's liberation being mine” (Kuiji
[0131a27–a28]), a realization of self-and-other not-two, not merely the universal law of rational extension. - The point of the observation: the West tends to take “compassion without a self” as a paradox awaiting resolution; the ancient masters take the four arousings of the mind (vast · foremost · constant · undistorted) as the sequence of cultivation-realization — arousing the mind is not a static proposition but an “abode” one can abide in and bring to fullness (Vasubandhu “the abode of the profound mind of benefit, in which this Vehicle's merit is fulfilled”). Paradox versus abode is itself one note worth marking between East and West.
- (This register is a Western-perspective observation; the scriptural and Yogācāra reading remains throughout the principal one, the West a secondary reference, not an adjudication. The specific literature is a matter for the researcher's inquiry.)
9 · Manuscript Placement
Kumārajīva T0235 [0749a05–a11] (root · The True Doctrine of the Great Vehicle). For the [loc] of the six versions' arousing-the-mind passage, see register 2: Bodhiruci T0236a [0753a01–a08] · Paramārtha T0237 [0762b01–b09] · Dharmagupta T0238 [0767a10–a18] · Xuanzang T220⑨ [0980b01–b12] · Yijing T0239 [0772a12–a20]. Sectioning / arousing-the-mind texts: Asaṅga T1510 [0757b06·0758b27–c01·0759b27–c25] · Vasubandhu T1511 [0781c23–0782a14] · Vasubandhu T1513 [0875a27–b14]. Ancient masters: Jizang T1699 [0101c22–0102b14] · Zhiyi T1698 [0077a20–b20] · Kuiji T1700 [0129c28–0131b09].
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 3 · The True Doctrine of the Great Vehicle · apparatus · Spring 2026