金剛般若波羅蜜經 分八 依法出生分
佛先把一種福堆到了頂：滿三千大千世界的七寶，盡數拿去布施，這福多不多？多得很。可是話音才落，佛輕輕一翻——另有一人，只在這部經裡持得四句偈，講給別人聽，他的福反而更勝。較量到此，不是要你比兩種善孰多孰少，而是借那可稱可量的七寶，反顯出一件不可稱量的事：福能積聚，卻進趣不了菩提；唯有領會、唯有傳遞這「無所得」的法，才真正走向覺。於是佛說，一切諸佛、一切覺悟之法，都從這部經出生——而所謂「佛法」，當下又即非佛法。無得，正是出生之處；法身本來就在，這部經不是把它造出來，是把它照了出來，像燈照物，物非燈所生。要緊的是看清：福堆得再高，也只是襯；真正從這裡出生的，是那無一法可執、卻生得出一切佛的般若。
The Buddha first piles merit to its peak: the seven treasures filling a great-thousandfold world, all given away in charity—is that merit great? Greatly so. Yet the words have barely landed when the Buddha gently turns them over—there is another who merely holds to the four-line verse within this sūtra and explains it to others, and his merit is greater still. The comparison drawn here is not to weigh which of two goods is the larger, but to use those weighable, measurable treasures to throw into relief one immeasurable thing: merit can be heaped up, yet it cannot advance toward awakening; only by grasping, only by transmitting this dharma of "nothing attained" does one truly walk toward awakening. And so the Buddha says that all the buddhas, and all the dharmas of awakening, are born from this sūtra—while what is called 「佛法」(buddha-dharma) is, in that very moment, precisely not buddha-dharma. "Nothing attained" is exactly the place of being born; the Dharma-body was there all along—this sūtra does not manufacture it, but shines it into view, as a lamp lights up a thing, the thing not being born of the lamp. What matters is to see clearly: however high the merit is heaped, it is only the foil; what is truly born from here is the prajñā in which not one dharma can be grasped, yet from which every buddha can be born.
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 8 · Born of the Dharma · essence · Spring 2026
〔一〕七寶布施福德甚多，即非福德性
經曰：
「須菩提！於意云何？若人滿三千大千世界七寶以用布施，是人所得福德，寧為多不？」須菩提言：「甚多，世尊！何以故？是福德即非福德性，是故如來說福德多。」
「須菩提！你怎麼想？假如有人拿滿滿一個三千大千世界那麼多的七種珍寶來行布施，這個人所得到的福德，算多不算多？」須菩提回答：「很多，世尊！為什麼這樣說呢？因為這福德並不是真有一個實在的『福德自性』可得，正因為它無實自性，如來才說它福德多。」
〔二〕持四句偈為他人說，其福更勝
經曰：
「若復有人，於此經中受持乃至四句偈等，為他人說，其福勝彼。
「如果另外有一個人，能夠在這部經裡受持，乃至只是受持其中的四句偈，並且把它講給別人聽，那麼這個人所得的福，反而勝過前面那位用滿世界七寶布施的人。」
〔三〕諸佛及菩提法皆從此經出，所謂佛法即非佛法
經曰：
何以故？須菩提！一切諸佛及諸佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提法，皆從此經出。須菩提！所謂佛法者，即非佛法。
「為什麼持經之福反而更勝呢？須菩提！因為一切諸佛，以及諸佛所成就的那個無上正等正覺之法，全都是從這部經出生的。須菩提！而所說的『佛法』，並不是真有一個叫『佛法』的實法可執——正因它無實自性，才是真正的佛法。」
〔1〕Giving the seven treasures gains great merit — which is no merit-nature
The sūtra says:
「須菩提！於意云何？若人滿三千大千世界七寶以用布施，是人所得福德，寧為多不？」須菩提言：「甚多，世尊！何以故？是福德即非福德性，是故如來說福德多。」
"Subhūti, what do you think — if someone took the seven kinds of treasure, enough to fill a whole great-thousandfold world-system, and gave them all away, would the merit this person gains be much or not?" Subhūti answered: "Very much, World-Honored One! Why is this said? Because this merit is no real, substantial 'merit-nature' to be had; it is just because it has no substantial nature of its own that the Tathāgata calls it much."
〔2〕Holding even a four-line verse and teaching it to others — that merit is greater still
The sūtra says:
「若復有人，於此經中受持乃至四句偈等，為他人說，其福勝彼。
"And if there were another person who could take up and hold even a four-line verse from this sūtra and teach it to others, the merit this person gains would surpass that of the one who gave away treasures enough to fill the world."
〔3〕All Buddhas and the dharma of awakening come from this sūtra; what is called Buddha-dharma is no Buddha-dharma
The sūtra says:
何以故？須菩提！一切諸佛及諸佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提法，皆從此經出。須菩提！所謂佛法者，即非佛法。
"Why does upholding the sūtra gain greater merit? Subhūti, because all the Buddhas, and the dharma of supreme, perfect awakening that the Buddhas accomplish, all come forth from this sūtra. Subhūti, and what is called 'Buddha-dharma' is no real, graspable thing named 'Buddha-dharma' — it is just because it has no substantial nature of its own that it is the true Buddha-dharma."
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 8 · Born of the Dharma · vernacular · Spring 2026
拿三性（遍計所執·依他起·圓成實）、三無性、了因生因，來照金剛經的「即非福德性·即非佛法」與「皆從此經出生」。
本分的眼：以福之多，反顯法之無得
這一分，佛先極力鋪張一種福：拿滿滿一個三千大千世界的七寶去布施，這福德算多不多？須菩提答「甚多」。正當福多到頂上，佛陡然一翻：另有一人，只在這部經裡受持四句偈、講給別人聽，他的福反而更勝。古德四家都把這一段判為「校量／格量」之文（吉藏「舉外施格量」、智顗「校量」、窺基「四重校量之第一校量」）。
較量的用意，不在權衡兩種善孰多孰少，而在以可量的福（七寶），反顯不可量的法（持經）——福愈多，愈襯出般若之無所得才是真勝。所以這一分有兩個「即非」：一個施於「福德」，一個施於「佛法」；中間夾一句「皆從此經出生」，把眼目由「福之較量」收到「諸佛之所出」上。下面就順經文一句一句照。
即非一：福德——即非福德性——是故說福德多
七寶布施的福，須菩提說它「即非福德性」。羅什這裡沒有「是名」的收尾，是一個單標的即非。順三性看：
- 福德＝依他起：七寶布施是緣生的事相，感得世間的有漏福，宛然有它的果報，可說、可量。窺基說「財施福能感世間福德多」——緣起的福不是沒有。
- 即非福德性＝遣遍計所執：所遣的，是凡夫在這緣生的福上妄加的一層執——以為實有一個「出世福德的自性」可得。這一層遍計無體。窺基說得明白：「即非福德性者，謂非是感出世之福德性也」——它不是能感出世果的那種福德自性；無著也說「以無彼福聚分別自性故」，這正是遣那層分別所執的自性。遍計所執就是這樣一層妄計：把心所分別出來的「實有」相，當成境上本有的東西。
- 圓成這一支在這裡隱含著：福不是斷滅（依他的幻福仍可說），所以「如來說福德多」——說多者，是就世諦上可說之事說。無著一語點透：「雖不如言辭有自性，而有可說事，以如來說福聚故。」遣盡那層實執，緣起的福照樣可說多。
所以「即非福德性」不是把福一筆抹掉，是遣掉「實有出世福德自性」這層遍計，顯它無自性——這就是般若一個「空」字，唯識用相無性（遍計所執的相本來就無）點出它空的究竟是什麼。
福為什麼「不勝」：有積聚而不能進趣
但福既然可說多，何以反不如持經之福？這一層，世親一語道破。他釋「即非福德」的論偈說：「福不趣菩提，二能趣菩提。」——布施的福有積聚的功能，卻不能進趣大菩提；唯有受持、演說這兩件事，才能進趣菩提，所以這兩者的福為勝。
用唯識的眼看，這分判極準：有漏的福德是依他緣生、可積可聚的果報之物，它在三界裡積累，卻不是引生無分別智、契會真如的因。窺基順此說：要「聽聞發生無分別智，方得出世無相果」——能引無分別智、能轉識成智的，才是進趣菩提的因。吉藏也依世親簡別：「即非福德者，非無漏無所得福德也」——所遣的是有漏福之執，所顯的是無漏無所得之福。福之較量，到此見出它的質別：不是多少之差，是「能積聚」與「能進趣」之別。
皆從此經出生：了因顯法身，生因成化身
中間一句是本分的關節：「一切諸佛及諸佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提法，皆從此經出。」羅什只一句「皆從此經出」，異譯則分作二句——菩提法從此經出、諸佛從此經生。出與生何以分說？世親判得最細：這是了因與生因之別。
唯識說「因」有兩種：一種是「生因」，能生起一個本來沒有的果（如種子生芽）；一種是「了因」，本來就有、只是被遮蔽，因緣一到把它顯了出來（如燈照物，物非燈所生，只是燈所顯）。世親就用這把分判讀「出／生」：
- 「出」對法身（了因所顯）：菩提之法即是法身，法身是無為的真如之體，它不是被生出來的——這部經（聞此經而引無分別智、契會真如）是了因，把本有的法身顯了出來，所以說法身「從此經出」。世親「菩提者名為法身，彼體實無為……此二能作了因、不能作生因」，窺基「於無為實相了因所得也」，說的都是這個。
- 「生」對化身（生因所成）：諸佛的受用、化現之身（相好莊嚴），是有為可成的，這部經對它是生因，所以說諸佛「從此經生」。世親「餘者，受報相好莊嚴……佛於此為生因」，窺基「報、化二佛從此經生」。
所以「皆從此經出生」不是一句籠統的讚經之辭。用唯識的了因生因一照，它分得清清楚楚：無為的法身唯可了（顯）、不可生，有為的化身則可生——這正對應唯識說「真如非生因所生，唯了因所顯」。「依法出生」四字的分量，就落在這了因／生因的嚴別上。
即非二：所謂佛法——即非佛法——是名佛法
末後一句即非施於「佛法」：「所謂佛法者，即非佛法。」羅什在這裡也省了「是名」的收尾（真諦、義淨補足作「是名佛法」）。順三性看：
- 佛法＝依他起：佛法是可說、可受持、可從經出的教法，依緣而立，宛然有它的假相。窺基說「理智圓明，名為佛法」——以無分別智契證真理，理智圓明，這就是可說的佛法。
- 即非佛法＝遣遍計所執：所遣的，是把佛法當成「分別所執、二乘餘人共有的實法」這一層執。窺基說「此唯十方諸佛同得……餘人不得，故即非佛法」——佛法是唯佛不共所證的，不是凡夫分別心執取的那個實「法」；吉藏也說「自佛以外，二乘菩薩無有此法，故云即非佛法」。所遣的，正是那層把佛法執為可取實法的遍計。
- 是名佛法＝立圓成、存假名（真諦·義淨補足）：遣盡了妄執，無自性的佛法仍為世諦上可說。無著兩邊雙遣：「『如來說非佛法』者，此遮增益邊；『是名佛法』者，此遮損減邊」——「即非」遮的是「實有佛法」的增益執，「是名」遮的是「全無佛法」的損減見。遣自性而存可說，這就是圓成。
一以貫之：兩個即非，同一個樞
把這一分的兩個即非並看，它們共用同一把鑰匙：遣掉那層「自性／如說即有」的實，而所遣不墮於無。較量出來的福（即非福德性）、所出生的佛法（即非佛法），都是「非實自性而有可說事」——遣遍計（即非）而不落損減（是名）。般若用一個「空」字總說，唯識則用三無性點明這「空」空的是什麼：遍計所執是相無性（相本來就無）、依他起是生無性（無自然而生的自性，只依他緣起）、圓成實是勝義無性（離一切遍計的勝義）。所以「即非」空的是遍計那一層，不是把依他的福、依他的佛法也一併抹掉。
之所以在「依法出生」之際把福德與佛法雙雙即非，正為顯出本分的真義：諸佛從這部經出生，而所出生的法、所較量的福，都無實自性可執——無得處，正是出生處。
唯識為鏡：同一實相，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——三性、三無性、了因生因、法身化身之說，自有其經源（解深密、瑜伽）與論本（攝論、三十頌、成唯識），般若另是一系；金剛經是般若，唯識只是讀它的一面鏡，本經並無唯識下游。而是同一「即非而存可說、無得而能出生」的實相，金剛經以經語（即非福德性·即非佛法·皆從此經出生）說，唯識以論語（三性三無性·遍計所執·了因生因·法身化身）說，兩相對照，其義益顯。三十頌以圓成實說「是名」的世諦可說、以轉依說無漏之所顯，與本分「即非福德性·從此經出」相應；攝大乘論說三身（自性·受用·變化身），正是世親「了因顯法身〔出〕·生因成化身〔生〕」的論本；成唯識論說真如唯了因所顯、非生因所生，與本分「法身從此經出（了）·化身從此經生（生）」相印。般若一系的心經「無智亦無得」，與本分「即非佛法」同一無得之法位——佛法無實自性可得，方為佛法。一句收束：金剛經以經語說的「即非佛法·皆從此經出生」，成唯識論以「了因生因·法身化身·無漏所顯」的技術語說的，是同一件事〔此一會通，釋慧鏡《從百法到金剛》（S5-P10）已明其旨〕。
Taking the three natures (遍計所執 parikalpita · 依他起 paratantra · 圓成實 pariniṣpanna), the three non-natures, and the cause-of-manifesting and cause-of-producing, to reflect the Diamond Sūtra’s “is not the nature of merit · is not the Buddha-dharma” and “all come forth from this sūtra.”
The Eye of This Division: by the Abundance of Merit, Conversely Showing the Dharma Has No Attainment
In this division the Buddha first amplifies a kind of merit to the utmost: to take a whole great-thousandfold world full of the seven treasures and give it in charity — is this merit much? Subhūti answers “very much.” Just when the merit is at its height, the Buddha abruptly turns: there is another person who only, within this sūtra, upholds a four-line verse and expounds it to others, and his merit on the contrary excels. The four ancient masters all judge this passage as text of “weighing / measuring” (校量／格量) (Jizang: 「舉外施格量」, raising outer giving for measure; Zhiyi: 「校量」, weighing; Kuiji: 「四重校量之第一校量」, the first of the four-fold weighing).
The intent of the weighing is not to weigh which of two goods is the greater, but by the measurable merit (the seven treasures) conversely to show the immeasurable Dharma (upholding the sūtra) — the more abundant the merit, the more it sets off that prajñā’s “nothing attained” is the true excelling. So this division has two “is-not”s: one applied to “merit,” one to “the Buddha-dharma”; and between them is set the line “all come forth from this sūtra,” drawing the eye from “the weighing of merit” onto “that from which all Buddhas come forth.” Below, we reflect line by line following the text.
The First Is-Not: Merit — Is Not the Nature of Merit — Therefore It Is Said the Merit Is Much
The merit of giving the seven treasures Subhūti says 「即非福德性」, is not the nature of merit. Kumārajīva here has no closing “is named,” a single statement of the “is-not.” Following the three natures:
- Merit = 依他起: the giving of the seven treasures is a dependently-arisen event, garnering worldly outflowing merit, vividly having its fruit-reward, sayable and measurable. Kuiji says 「財施福能感世間福德多」 (the merit of material giving can garner much worldly merit) — the dependently-arisen merit is not nonexistent.
- Is not the nature of merit = removing 遍計所執: what is removed is the layer of clinging the ordinary person deludedly adds upon this dependently-arisen merit — supposing there really is a “self-nature of supramundane merit” to be attained. This layer of wholly-imagined clinging has no substance. Kuiji says it plainly: 「即非福德性者，謂非是感出世之福德性也」 (“is not the nature of merit” means it is not that nature-of-merit which garners the supramundane fruit); Asaṅga too says 「以無彼福聚分別自性故」 (because that aggregate of merit has no discriminated self-nature) — this is exactly the removing of that layer of discriminated, clung self-nature. 遍計所執 is just such a layer of deluded reckoning: taking the “really existent” mark discriminated by mind for something inherent in the object.
- The branch of the perfectly-accomplished lies hidden here: the merit is not annihilation (the other-dependent illusory merit can still be spoken), so 「如來說福德多」 (the Tathāgata says the merit is much) — to say “much” is spoken with respect to the matter sayable on the conventional plane. Asaṅga puts it through in a word: 「雖不如言辭有自性，而有可說事，以如來說福聚故」 (though it has no self-nature as the words say, yet there is a sayable matter, since the Tathāgata speaks of the aggregate of merit). The layer of real clinging removed clean, the dependently-arisen merit can still be spoken of as much.
So “is not the nature of merit” does not erase the merit at a stroke; it removes the layer of wholly-imagined clinging to “a really existent self-nature of supramundane merit,” showing it without self-nature — this is prajñā’s single word “empty,” and Yogācāra by 相無性 (the non-nature of marks — the mark of 遍計所執 is from the first non-existent) points out what this “empty” ultimately empties.
Why the Merit “Does Not Excel”: It Has Accumulation but Cannot Advance
But since the merit can be spoken of as much, why does it on the contrary not match the merit of upholding the sūtra? This layer Vasubandhu lays bare in a word. Explaining the treatise-verse on “is not merit,” he says: 「福不趣菩提，二能趣菩提」 — giving’s merit has the function of accumulation, yet cannot advance toward great bodhi; only the two things, upholding and expounding, can advance toward bodhi, and so the merit of these two excels.
Seen through the Yogācāra eye, this judgment is most exact: outflowing merit is a dependently-arisen, accumulable thing of fruit-reward; it accumulates within the three realms, yet is not the cause that gives rise to the non-discriminating wisdom and realizes 真如. Kuiji says accordingly: one must 「聽聞發生無分別智，方得出世無相果」 (hear, and give rise to the non-discriminating wisdom, then attain the supramundane markless fruit) — what can draw out the non-discriminating wisdom, can turn consciousness into wisdom, is the cause that advances toward bodhi. Jizang too, following Vasubandhu, distinguishes: 「即非福德者，非無漏無所得福德也」 (“is not merit” means it is not the outflow-free, nothing-attained merit) — what is removed is the clinging to outflowing merit, what is shown forth is the outflow-free, nothing-attained merit. The weighing of merit, come here, shows its difference of quality: not a difference of more and less, but a difference between “able to accumulate” and “able to advance.”
All Come Forth from This Sūtra: the Cause-of-Manifesting Shows the Dharma-Body, the Cause-of-Producing Forms the Transformation-Body
The middle line is the joint of this division: 「一切諸佛及諸佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提法，皆從此經出」, all Buddhas, and the anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi dharma of all Buddhas, come forth from this sūtra. Kumārajīva has only the one phrase “come forth from this sūtra”; the variant translations divide it into two — the bodhi-dharma comes forth from this sūtra, the Buddhas are born from this sūtra. Why are “come forth” and “born” spoken separately? Vasubandhu judges it most finely: this is the difference between the cause-of-manifesting (了因) and the cause-of-producing (生因).
Yogācāra says “cause” is of two kinds: one is the “cause-of-producing,” able to produce a fruit not there before (as a seed produces a sprout); one is the “cause-of-manifesting,” which is there from the first, only veiled, and which the meeting of conditions manifests forth (as a lamp lights a thing — the thing not produced by the lamp, only shown by it). Vasubandhu reads “come forth / born” with just this distinction:
- “Come forth” pairs with the dharma-body (shown by the cause-of-manifesting): the dharma of bodhi is just the dharma-body, and the dharma-body is the unconditioned substance of 真如; it is not produced — this sūtra (hearing which draws out the non-discriminating wisdom and realizes 真如) is the cause-of-manifesting, manifesting forth the inherent dharma-body, and so the dharma-body is said to “come forth from this sūtra.” Vasubandhu’s 「菩提者名為法身，彼體實無為……此二能作了因、不能作生因」 (bodhi is called the dharma-body, its substance truly unconditioned… these two can act as cause-of-manifesting, not as cause-of-producing), and Kuiji’s 「於無為實相了因所得也」 (with respect to the unconditioned real-mark, attained through the cause-of-manifesting), both say this.
- “Born” pairs with the transformation-body (formed by the cause-of-producing): the Buddhas’ enjoyment- and manifestation-bodies (the dignified glory of marks) are conditioned and can be formed; toward these this sūtra is the cause-of-producing, and so the Buddhas are said to be “born from this sūtra.” Vasubandhu’s 「餘者，受報相好莊嚴……佛於此為生因」 (the rest — the received-reward, the dignified glory of marks… the Buddha is here the cause-of-producing), and Kuiji’s 「報、化二佛從此經生」 (the two Buddhas of reward and transformation are born from this sūtra).
So “all come forth and are born from this sūtra” is no vague phrase of praising the sūtra. Reflected once by Yogācāra’s cause-of-manifesting and cause-of-producing, it divides perfectly clear: the unconditioned dharma-body can only be manifested (shown), not produced; the conditioned transformation-body can be produced — exactly answering Yogācāra’s 「真如非生因所生，唯了因所顯」 (真如 is not produced by the cause-of-producing, only shown by the cause-of-manifesting). The weight of the four words “born of the Dharma” falls upon just this strict distinction of cause-of-manifesting versus cause-of-producing.
The Second Is-Not: the So-Called Buddha-Dharma — Is Not the Buddha-Dharma — Is Named the Buddha-Dharma
The closing line applies the “is-not” to “the Buddha-dharma”: 「所謂佛法者，即非佛法」, the so-called Buddha-dharma is not the Buddha-dharma. Kumārajīva here too omits the closing “is named” (Paramārtha and Yijing fill it out as 「是名佛法」, is named the Buddha-dharma). Following the three natures:
- The Buddha-dharma = 依他起: the Buddha-dharma is a teaching sayable, upholdable, and able to come forth from the sūtra, set up in reliance on conditions, vividly having its provisional mark. Kuiji says 「理智圓明，名為佛法」 (principle-and-wisdom perfectly clear is called the Buddha-dharma) — by the non-discriminating wisdom realizing the true principle, principle and wisdom perfectly clear, this is the sayable Buddha-dharma.
- Is not the Buddha-dharma = removing 遍計所執: what is removed is the layer of clinging that takes the Buddha-dharma for “a real dharma discriminatedly clung, shared in common by the two vehicles and others.” Kuiji says 「此唯十方諸佛同得……餘人不得，故即非佛法」 (this is realized in common only by the Buddhas of the ten directions… others do not attain it, so it is not the Buddha-dharma) — the Buddha-dharma is the uncommon realization of Buddhas alone, not that real “dharma” which the ordinary person’s discriminating mind grasps; Jizang too says 「自佛以外，二乘菩薩無有此法，故云即非佛法」 (apart from the Buddha, the two vehicles and bodhisattvas have not this dharma, so it is said to be not the Buddha-dharma). What is removed is exactly that layer of wholly-imagined clinging that takes the Buddha-dharma as a graspable real dharma.
- Is named the Buddha-dharma = establishing the perfectly-accomplished, keeping the provisional name (filled out by Paramārtha and Yijing): the deluded clinging removed clean, the self-natureless Buddha-dharma is still sayable on the conventional plane. Asaṅga removes both sides: 「『如來說非佛法』者，此遮增益邊；『是名佛法』者，此遮損減邊」 (“the Tathāgata says it is not the Buddha-dharma” blocks the side of superimposition; “is named the Buddha-dharma” blocks the side of denial) — “is-not” blocks the superimposing clinging of “a really existent Buddha-dharma,” “is named” blocks the denying view of “no Buddha-dharma at all.” Removing the self-nature yet keeping the sayable — this is the perfectly-accomplished.
All of One Thread: Two Is-Nots, One Pivot
Set the two “is-not”s of this division side by side, and they share one key: removing that layer of “self-nature / existent-as-said” reality, and what is removed does not fall into non-existence. The weighed merit (is not the nature of merit) and the born Buddha-dharma (is not the Buddha-dharma) are both “without real self-nature yet having a sayable matter” — removing the wholly-imagined (is-not) without falling into denial (is named). Prajñā states it wholesale with one word “empty”; Yogācāra by the three non-natures points out what this “empty” empties: 遍計所執 is 相無性 (the non-nature of marks — the mark is from the first non-existent), 依他起 is 生無性 (the non-nature of arising — no self-nature of arising of itself, only dependent co-arising), 圓成實 is 勝義無性 (the non-nature of ultimate meaning — the ultimate apart from all imputation). So the “is-not” empties that layer of the wholly-imagined, not erasing the other-dependent merit and the other-dependent Buddha-dharma along with it.
That at the very moment of “born of the Dharma” the merit and the Buddha-dharma are both made “is-not” is precisely to show the true meaning of this division: the Buddhas are born of this sūtra, and the dharma born and the merit weighed have no real self-nature to be clung — the place of nothing-attained is precisely the place of coming-forth.
Yogācāra as Mirror: the Same Reality, 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 the three natures, the three non-natures, the cause-of-manifesting and cause-of-producing, the dharma-body and transformation-body have their own scriptural source (the Saṃdhinirmocana, the Yogācārabhūmi) and treatises (the Mahāyāna-saṃgraha, the Thirty Verses, the Cheng weishi lun); the Diamond Sūtra is prajñā, and Yogācāra is only one mirror for reading it — this sūtra has no Yogācāra downstream. Rather, it is that the same reality of “is-not yet sayable, nothing attained yet able to be born forth” the Diamond Sūtra states in the words of the sūtra (is not the nature of merit · is not the Buddha-dharma · all come forth from this sūtra), and Yogācāra states in the words of the treatise (the three natures and three non-natures · 遍計所執 · the cause-of-manifesting and cause-of-producing · the dharma-body and transformation-body); set side by side, the meaning shows the clearer. The Thirty Verses, by the perfectly-accomplished, speak the conventional sayable of “is named,” and by 轉依 the outflow-free that is shown forth, according with this division’s “is not the nature of merit · come forth from this sūtra.” The Mahāyāna-saṃgraha’s teaching of the three bodies (self-nature · enjoyment · transformation body) is exactly Vasubandhu’s treatise for “the cause-of-manifesting shows the dharma-body〔come forth〕 · the cause-of-producing forms the transformation-body〔born〕.” The Cheng weishi lun’s teaching that 真如 is only shown by the cause-of-manifesting, not produced by the cause-of-producing, seals with this division’s “the dharma-body comes forth from this sūtra (manifested) · the transformation-body is born from this sūtra (produced).” The Heart Sūtra of the prajñā lineage’s 「無智亦無得」 is, with this division’s “is not the Buddha-dharma,” one and the same dharma-plane of nothing attained — the Buddha-dharma being without real self-nature to attain is just what makes it the Buddha-dharma. To close in one line: what the Diamond Sūtra says in the words of the sūtra — 「即非佛法 · 皆從此經出生」 — and what the Cheng weishi lun says in the technical terms of “the cause-of-manifesting and cause-of-producing · the dharma-body and transformation-body · the outflow-free shown forth” are one and the same matter 〔this rapprochement is already set out in Shi Huijing’s From the Hundred Dharmas to the Diamond (S5-P10)〕.
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 8 · Born of the Dharma · exposition · Spring 2026
考據Apparatus
一、科判定位（福德較量 · 加「較量結構」小目）
| 科判系統 | 此分之位 |
|---|---|
| 昭明 32分 | 分八 依法出生分 |
| 釋慧鏡 §17 二分 | 前半（眾生空·破四相·煩惱障；福德較量以反顯無得） |
| 道安 三分 | 正宗分 · 校量持經功德之初 |
| 無著十八住 T1510 | 欲得法身住·福相法身（十八住第四「欲得法身」[0757b06–07] 攝言說·證得二法身；證得法身復二，本分為福相法身「為欲得福相法身故，經言『若此三千大千世界』」[0757c01–02]；即非佛法歸七義句第五「不失」之離二邊 [0758c23–0759a08]） |
| 世親 二十七疑 T1511/T1513 | 「福不趣菩提」之疑——法既不可取不可說，受持為福耶？答以「福不趣菩提，二能趣菩提」（T1511 0784c27–0785a01／T1513 0877a17–a19） |
| 吉藏（三論）T1699 | 「就此門中開為三別：第一、舉外施格量…」[0108a15–16]；本分為「舉外施格量」之初（三千七寶格量四句）[0108a23–24] |
| 智顗（天台）T1698 | 「『三千七寶』下，校量」[0078b17–18]（一念信解後復一番格量） |
| 窺基（唯識）T1700 | 四重校量之第一校量「謂以三千大千世界七寶布施，不如受持一四句偈」[0133a01–03]；一一段中初三破疑、第四正校量 [0133a13–14] |
較量結構：本分立「七寶布施／持四句偈」之對較——正面舉布施福德之多（滿三千大千七寶），陡然以「持四句偈為他人說，其福勝彼」翻轉，以福之多反顯經之無得。古德四家俱判此為「校量／格量」之文（吉藏「舉外施格量」、智顗「校量」、窺基「第一校量」）。其反顯之理，世親一語道破：布施福有積聚義而不能進趣菩提（流支「積聚義／進趣義」[0785a07–11]；義淨「聚積義／肩荷義」[0877a24–28]），受持演說二者能趣（持）菩提，故福勝。「依法出生」者，諸佛及佛菩提法皆從此經出生——此分之眼，由「福德之較量」轉「諸佛之所出」。本分「即非」二現（即非福德性·即非佛法，見目三）。
二、異譯對勘（六漢譯 · 福德較量一段）
要句：七寶布施福德多 / 即非福德（性·聚）/ 持四句偈為他人說福勝 / 諸佛及菩提法皆從此經出生 / 即非佛法
| 版本 | 福德較量一段（逐字節錄） | [出處] |
|---|---|---|
| 羅什 T235（原典） | 「於意云何？若人滿三千大千世界七寶以用布施，是人所得福德，寧為多不？」須菩提言：「甚多，世尊！何以故？是福德即非福德性，是故如來說福德多。」「若復有人，於此經中受持乃至四句偈等，為他人說，其福勝彼。何以故？須菩提！一切諸佛及諸佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提法，皆從此經出。須菩提！所謂佛法者，即非佛法。」 | 0749b18–b25 |
| 菩提流支 T236 | ……是善男子、善女人，所得福德，寧為多不？」須菩提言：「甚多，婆伽婆！甚多，修伽陀！……是福德聚，即非福德聚，是故如來說福德聚、福德聚。」……「若復於此經中，受持乃至四句偈等，為他人說，其福勝彼無量不可數。何以故？……一切諸佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提法，皆從此經出。一切諸佛如來，皆從此經生。須菩提！所謂佛法、佛法者，即非佛法。」 | 0753b24–c05 |
| 真諦 T237 | ……因此布施生福多不？」須菩提言：「甚多，世尊！甚多，修伽陀！……此福德聚，即非福德聚，是故如來說福德聚。」……「若復有人，從此經中受四句偈，為他正說，顯示其義。此人……所生福德，最多於彼無量無數。何以故？須菩提！如來無上菩提，從此福成。諸佛世尊，從此福生。何以故？須菩提！所言佛法者，即非佛法，是名佛法。」 | 0762c22–0763a05 |
| 達摩笈多 T238 | ……「若彼，世尊！福聚；如來說非聚；彼，世尊！如來說福聚、福聚者。」……「若此法本，乃至四句等偈，受已，為他等分別廣說，此，彼緣，多過福聚生，無量、不可數。彼何所因？此出，善實！如來、應、正遍知，無上正遍知；此生佛、世尊。彼何所因？佛法、佛法者，善實！非佛法，如是彼；彼故，說名佛法者。」 | 0767c14–c24 |
| 玄奘 T220⑨ | ……由此因緣所生福聚寧為多不？」善現答言：「甚多！世尊！……何以故？世尊！福德聚福德聚者，如來說為非福德聚，是故如來說名福德聚福德聚。」……「於此法門乃至四句伽他，受持、讀誦、究竟通利，及廣為他宣說、開示、如理作意……所生福聚，甚多於前無量無數。何以故？一切如來、應、正等覺阿耨多羅三藐三菩提皆從此經出，諸佛世尊皆從此經生。所以者何？善現！諸佛法諸佛法者，如來說為非諸佛法，是故如來說名諸佛法諸佛法。」 | 0981a10–a24 |
| 義淨 T239 | ……得福多不？」妙生言：「甚多，世尊！何以故？此福聚者，則非是聚，是故如來說為福聚、福聚。」……「若復有人，能於此經乃至一四句頌，若自受持，為他演說……所生福聚，極多於彼無量無數。何以故？妙生！由諸如來無上等覺，從此經出；諸佛世尊，從此經生。是故妙生！佛法者，如來說非佛法，是名佛法。」 | 0772b27–c08 |
異文所繫：
- 「福德／福德性／福德聚／福聚」：羅什作「福德／即非福德性」（性＝自性、體性，指出世福德性，見目四窺基釋）；流支、真諦、玄奘、笈多作「福德聚／福聚」，義淨作「福聚」。此「聚」字義淨論本（T1513）明標其梵 skandha（塞建陀）「有其多義，或是聚義，或是肩義，或是分段義……昔人不解梵音，又譯之為趣，深成遼落」
[0877a23–24]——即「福德聚」與羅什、流支舊譯之「趣／進趣」分歧，繫於 skandha 一語「積聚／肩荷」二義之取捨（見目四、目五）。 - 能斷系重詞：玄奘「福德聚福德聚者……說名福德聚福德聚」、「諸佛法諸佛法者……說名諸佛法諸佛法」
[0981a14–15·a23–24]，流支「福德聚、福德聚」「所謂佛法、佛法者」[0753b28·c05]，笈多「福聚、福聚者」「佛法、佛法者」[0767c17·c23–24]，義淨「福聚、福聚」[0772c01]——能斷三系（玄奘·義淨·笈多）及流支俱具重詞（同名二舉），即非式作「X·X者，非X，是名 X·X」；羅什、真諦則單舉。重詞乃法相系傳本之文相，逐字錄之，不縮。 - 「皆從此經出／此經生」：羅什但「皆從此經出」（一句）；流支、玄奘、義淨、笈多分作二句——菩提（法）從此經出、諸佛（如來）從此經生（流支「皆從此經出。一切諸佛如來，皆從此經生」
[0753c04–05]）；真諦獨作「從此福成／從此福生」（不作「經」而作「福」，繫於前文福德）。出／生之分，世親論判為「了因（出）／生因（生）」之別（見目四）。 - 「即非佛法」：六本全具——羅什、真諦、義淨作「佛法者，即非佛法，是名佛法」（真諦·義淨具三句式，羅什止「即非佛法」無「是名」尾）；流支「所謂佛法、佛法者，即非佛法」；玄奘「諸佛法諸佛法者，說為非諸佛法，是故說名諸佛法」；笈多「佛法、佛法者，非佛法……說名佛法者」。即非之施於「佛法」，乃此分由「福德較量」轉入「法之無自性」之文證。
三、即非・三性（眼 · 本分二即非）
本分「即非」二現：「是福德即非福德性」[0749b20–21] 與「所謂佛法者，即非佛法」[0749b25]。
其一「福德 — 即非福德性 — （是故說福德多）」：羅什無「是名」尾，作單標之即非。映三性：
- 福德（X）即依他起——七寶布施緣生之有漏福，事相宛然（窺基「財施福能感世間福德多」
[0136a28–29]）。 - 即非福德性即遣遍計——非分別所執之「實有出世福德自性」（窺基「即非福德性者，謂非是感出世之福德性也」
[0136a25–27]；無著「世尊！若福聚，非聚者，此遮增益邊，以無彼福聚分別自性故」[0758c26–27]）。 - 圓成一支於本分隱攝：福德非無（依他幻有可說），唯無實自性（圓成真實），故「如來說福德多」——說多者，世諦可說事（無著「雖不如言辭有自性，而有可說事，以如來說福聚故」
[0758c28–0759a01]）。
其二「（所謂）佛法 — 即非佛法 —（是名佛法）」：羅什作「所謂佛法者，即非佛法」（無「是名」尾；真諦·義淨補足三句「是名佛法」）。映三性：
- 佛法（X）即依他——可說、可受持、可從經出之教法（窺基「理智圓明，名為佛法」
[0136b24]）。 - 即非佛法即遣遍計——非分別所執、非二乘餘人所共之實法（窺基「此唯十方諸佛同得……餘人不得，故即非佛法」
[0136b24–26]；吉藏「自佛以外，二乘菩薩無有此法，故云即非佛法」[0109a27–28]）。 - 是名佛法（真諦·義淨）即立圓成——無自性而為世諦可說（無著「是名佛法者，此遮損減邊」
[0759a02–03]；「為世諦故，如來說名佛法」[0759a06–07]）。
本分之眼：二即非俱以「遣自性而存可說」為樞——遣遍計（即非）而不墮損減（是名），正三性之動轉。較量之福、所出之佛法，皆「非實自性而有可說事」。此即非映三性之讀，見釋慧鏡《即非三段式映射唯識三性》（S5-P01）；本分為其於福德較量位之二施。
四、諸家異釋（古德 · 福不趣菩提·了因生因·二邊 · 加重）
核心 加重 ——世親《金剛般若論》二偈（福不趣菩提／於實名了因），二漢譯並存： 世親以「福不趣菩提，二能趣菩提」釋「即非福德」，以「於實名了因」釋「皆從此經出生」，逐項錨於經文；二譯名異義一。
世親 T1511（菩提流支譯） 論偈 [0784c29–0785a01]：
「受持法及說，不空於福德；福不趣菩提，二能趣菩提。」
- 釋「即非福德聚」：「彼福德不趣大菩提，二能趣大菩提故。何者為二？一者受持；二者演說。」
[0785a03–06]福德聚「有積聚義」而「於菩提不能進趣」，受持·演說二者「此二能趣大菩提，是故於彼福德中此福為勝」[0785a08–11]。 - 釋「皆從此經出生」——論偈
[0785a17–18]：「於實名了因，亦為餘生因；唯獨諸佛法，福成第一體。」「菩提者名為法身，彼體實無為。是故於彼法身，此二能作了因、不能作生因。餘者，受報相好莊嚴……佛於此為生因」[0785a19–22]——「出」對法身（了因所顯）、「生」對化身（生因所成）。
世親 T1513（義淨譯） 論頌 [0877a19]：
「福不持菩提，彼二能持故。」
- 「言福於菩提不能持負故，二於菩提是能持故」
[0877a20–21]；二者＝自受·為他說[0877a21]。 - 義淨校梵（聚／趣之分）
[0877a23–24]：「梵云塞建陀，有其多義，或是聚義，或是肩義，或是分段義……此中且據二種，此為昔人不解梵音，又譯之為趣，深成遼落」——故福德有「聚積義」「肩荷義」二種，由不能持荷菩提故名「非聚」[0877a24–28]。 - 釋「從此經出生」——論頌
[0877b03]：「得自性因故，此餘者是生。」「言菩提者即是法身，此是無為性故，名為自性。是故此二是得彼之因（了因），非是生因。若望此，餘受用化身是生因故」[0877b04–06]。 - 釋「即非佛法」——論頌
[0877b09]：「唯是佛法故，能成最勝福。」「言『如來說為非佛法』者，此顯所覺之法唯佛能證，由不共性是故最勝」[0877b10–11]。
〔二譯對位：福不趣／福不持 · 了因/生因（出/生）· 福成第一體／能成最勝福——同一世親論之二漢譯，名異義一。〕
無著 T1510（達摩笈多譯）：本分為十八住「欲得法身」住中之福相法身——「證得法身亦有二種，謂智相、福相……為欲得福相法身故，經言『若此三千大千世界』」[0757b24–c02]。即非佛法判為「不失·離二邊」：「『如來說非佛法』者，此遮增益邊。『是名佛法』者，此遮損減邊」[0759a01–03]；「如來說非佛法者，顯示不共義。是名佛法者，顯示相應義」[0759a03–04]；福聚句同理「『若福聚，非聚』者，此遮增益邊，以無彼福聚分別自性故」[0758c26–27]。
吉藏（三論）T1699：科為「舉外施格量」[0108a15–16]。釋「即非福德」依論：「論云『福不趣菩提』，此簡布施之福雖多，此是有漏福德，即非福德者，非無漏無所得福德也」[0108c04–06]；「論經重言『福德福德』……福德凡有二種：一者、有漏福德；二者、無漏福德」[0108c06–08]（兼釋流支重詞）。釋「即非佛法」依論偈「唯獨諸佛法，福成第一體」[0109a25–26]：「所言佛法者，唯佛是無上菩提之法也。即非佛法者，自佛以外，二乘菩薩無有此法，故云即非佛法也」[0109a26–28]。
智顗（天台）T1698：「『三千七寶』下，校量……積寶多而功薄，四句約而福厚……七寶是事善、緣因，天人果報不動不出，故以動出之慧導之得成菩提，一念圓信能導眾善，此心為勝，實相能出諸法，法即非法，諸法不生般若生也」[0078b17–25]——以「實相出諸法·法即非法」一語貫「即非佛法」與「從此經出生」。
窺基（唯識）T1700：科為「四重校量之第一校量」[0133a01–03]，一一段中「初三破疑，第四正校量」[0133a13–14]。釋「即非福德性」：「謂非是感出世之福德性也，謂要聽聞發生無分別智，方得出世無相果故」[0136a26–27]；引論「如來說福德性，即非福德性者，此遮增益邊，以無彼福聚分別」[0128a06–08]。釋「從此經出」：「謂由因聽聞此經故……引無分別智，契會真智圓滿故，從此生理……名之為出」[0136b16–19]；「一切諸佛者，報、化二佛從此經生也。及諸佛阿耨菩提者，諸法身佛從此經出也。論云『於實名了因』者，謂於無為實相了因所得也」[0136b19–21]。釋「即非佛法」：「以無分別智契證真理，理智圓明，名為佛法。此唯十方諸佛同得，名為佛法；餘人不得，故即非佛法」[0136b23–26]。
古德三家異流（三論·天台·唯識）於本分同歸世親二偈：即非福德＝福不趣菩提（有漏福不能進趣／持荷大菩提，無漏二行能趣）；皆從此經出生＝了因（出·顯法身）／生因（生·成化身）；即非佛法＝唯佛不共所證（餘人不得）。較量之眼，由「福多」反顯「法無自性而諸佛從之出生」——此即本分「依法出生」之古德定讀。
五、術語
福德性／福德聚／福聚 puṇya-skandha（聚＝ skandha；義淨論明標「塞建陀」一語「聚義·肩義·分段義」三義，舊譯「趣」乃「進趣」一義之取，「深成遼落」[0877a23–24]；羅什作「福德性」取自性·體性義）·
七寶 sapta-ratna ·
四句偈 catuṣpadikā gāthā（窺基「明此宗義之處義圓足者，即為一句」[0136b05–06]）·
了因／生因 jñāpaka-hetu ／ kāraka-hetu（世親：了因顯法身〔出〕·生因成化身〔生〕T1511 0785a19–22）·
佛法 buddha-dharma（無著「攝波羅蜜事及念處等菩提分」[0759a08–09]；窺基「理智圓明……唯十方諸佛同得」[0136b24–25]）·
有漏／無漏福德 sāsrava ／ anāsrava puṇya（吉藏判「即非福德＝有漏福德，非無漏無所得福德」[0108c10–11]）。〔梵文發音輔助；「聚」之 skandha 多義見目二、目四之義淨校梵。〕
六、譬喻・修辭（較量結構 · 福德反顯）
本分無具象譬喻（虛空喻在分四·須彌山喻在分十一）。修辭之要在較量之翻轉：先極言布施之福（滿三千大千世界七寶，「甚多」），正當福多之頂，陡轉為「持四句偈為他人說，其福勝彼」——以有量之多（七寶）反顯無量之勝（持經），復以「皆從此經出生」收於諸佛之本。世親判此為「勝福德譬喻挍量」[0784c27]（流支論）——較量本身即一修辭格：以福之積聚（可量）對顯法之能趣（不可量），多者反成襯，無得反成勝。智顗「積寶多而功薄，四句約而福厚」[0078b19] 即此對較之的評。此「較量結構」於福德較量四分（八·十一·十五·廿四）反復回環，皆以福反顯無得。此目於本分以「較量」見其修辭，具象譬喻則於分四·廿六·卅二加重。
七、互讀
- 三十頌（T1586）：二空·轉依（v.29 圓成實）·圓成實之了因所顯——本分「諸佛菩提法（法身）從此經出·了因所得」之論本對應。
- 攝大乘論（T1594）：彼果智分·法身（三身：自性／受用／變化身）——世親「了因顯法身〔出〕·生因成化身〔生〕」之三身論本。
- 成唯識論（T1585）：法身·了因生因（無為真如非生因所生，唯了因所顯）·無漏種——本分「即非福德性·無漏無所得福·從此經出」之論本技術語。
- 心經（T251）：「無智亦無得」——本分「即非佛法·所言佛法者即非佛法」即「無得」之法位（佛法無實自性可得，方為佛法）。
本分「即非福德性·即非佛法·從此經出生」，即三十頌·成唯識論「無漏福·了因生因·法身」之經語對應；「即非佛法」即心經「無得」之法位。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〕：金剛經「即非佛法」一語，世親論以「福不趣菩提·二能趣菩提·了因/生因」之技術語說同一事。〔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）
- 「即非福德性」之以福反顯無得 ↔ 西方價值論之「工具善／自體善」之分（手段價值對自身目的之價值）：西方多讀為「布施福乃工具善、般若乃自體善」之價值階序；古德／唯識讀為三性動轉——福非無（依他可說），唯無實自性（遣遍計），「不趣菩提」非劣於般若，乃有積聚而不能進趣之質別（世親「積聚義／進趣義」），是體性之轉，非價值之高下排序。
- 「皆從此經出生」（諸佛從經生） ↔ 西方宗教哲學之「聖典作為神聖之源」、解構主義之「文本性」（text 為意義之所從出）：西方或讀為「經典神聖化」之宗教社會學現象，或讀為「文本生成意義」之語言哲學；古德判為「了因／生因」之嚴別——經非「生」法身（法身無為，非所生），乃「了」（顯）法身；唯化身為經所「生」。出／生之分，非西方「文本生成」之單義，乃唯識顯／生二因之動轉。
- 「即非佛法」之佛法無自性 ↔ 西方真矛盾論（dialetheism；普里斯特、加菲爾德論佛教即非）與否定神學（佛法不可如言執實，近 via negativa）：西方多讀「即非」為靜態之邏輯弔詭或純否定；唯識讀為「遮增益（即非）·遮損減（是名）」之雙遮（無著二邊說）——遣自性而存可說，非純否定，乃轉依所顯之圓成。此東西之別，正一可注之義。
- 較量結構（七寶對四句偈） ↔ 西方功利／義務之較量、價值不可通約論（incommensurability）：可對觀；然較量之的不在「量孰多」，而在「以可量反顯不可量」——福之較量本為破福執之方便，非權衡二善。
- （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 [0749b18–b25]（原典 · 依法出生分）。六譯本福德較量一段 [出處] 見目二：流支 T0236a [0753b24–c05] · 真諦 T0237 [0762c22–0763a05] · 笈多 T0238 [0767c14–c24] · 玄奘 T220⑨ [0981a10–a24] · 義淨 T0239 [0772b27–c08]。 論本（世親二偈·無著福相法身）：世親 T1511 [0784c27–0785a25] · 世親 T1513 [0877a17–b12] · 無著 T1510a [0757b24–c02·0758c23–0759a09]。 古德：吉藏 T1699 [0108a15–0109b01] · 智顗 T1698 [0078b17–b25] · 窺基 T1700 [0128a06–08·0133a01–14·0136a23–b26]。
1 · Placement in the Sectioning Schemes (the weighing of merit · adds a "weighing-structure" sub-register)
| Sectioning scheme | Placement of this division |
|---|---|
| Zhaoming 32 divisions | Division 8, Born of the Dharma (依法出生分) |
| Shi Huijing §17 two-part | First half (emptiness of beings · breaking the four marks · the affliction-hindrance; the weighing of merit, to reveal no-attainment in reverse) |
| Dao'an's three-part schema | Main-teaching division · the start of the weighing of the merit of upholding the sūtra |
| Asaṅga's eighteen abodes, T1510 | Abode of desiring to attain the dharma-body · the dharma-body of the mark of merit (the fourth abode "desiring to attain the dharma-body" [0757b06–07] embraces the two dharma-bodies, of speech and of attainment; the attained dharma-body is again twofold, and this division is the dharma-body of the mark of merit 「為欲得福相法身故，經言『若此三千大千世界』」 [0757c01–02]; "is-not Buddha-dharma" belongs to the fifth of the seven-sense lines, "not lost," the parting from both extremes [0758c23–0759a08]) |
| Vasubandhu's twenty-seven doubts, T1511/T1513 | The doubt "merit does not advance toward bodhi" — since dharma cannot be grasped or spoken, is upholding it for merit? Answered with 「福不趣菩提，二能趣菩提」 (T1511 0784c27–0785a01 / T1513 0877a17–a19) |
| Jizang (Three-Treatise), T1699 | 「就此門中開為三別：第一、舉外施格量…」 [0108a15–16]; this division is the start of "raising external giving for the weighing" (the three-thousandfold seven jewels weighed against the four lines) [0108a23–24] |
| Zhiyi (Tiantai), T1698 | 「『三千七寶』下，校量」 [0078b17–18] (a further round of weighing after the single thought of faith-and-understanding) |
| Kuiji (Yogācāra), T1700 | The first of the fourfold weighing 「謂以三千大千世界七寶布施，不如受持一四句偈」 [0133a01–03]; in each passage the first three break doubt and the fourth is the direct weighing [0133a13–14] |
The weighing-structure: this division sets up the contrast "giving the seven jewels / upholding the four-line verse" — it raises, on the positive side, the muchness of the merit of giving (the seven jewels filling the three-thousandfold great-thousand world), then abruptly overturns it with "upholding and teaching to others a four-line verse, that merit surpasses it," using the muchness of merit to reveal in reverse the sūtra's no-attainment. All four ancient-master houses judge this as a "weighing" passage (Jizang 「舉外施格量」, Zhiyi 「校量」, Kuiji 「第一校量」). Vasubandhu states the principle of its reverse-revealing in a word: the merit of giving has the sense of accumulation but cannot advance toward bodhi (Bodhiruci 「積聚義／進趣義」 [0785a07–11]; Yijing 「聚積義／肩荷義」 [0877a24–28]), while upholding and expounding, the two, can advance toward (uphold) bodhi, hence the merit surpasses. "Born of the dharma" means the buddhas and the buddhas' bodhi-dharma all issue from and are born of this sūtra — the eye of this division turns from "the weighing of merit" to "what the buddhas issue from." This division's "is-not" appears twice (is-not the nature of merit · is-not Buddha-dharma, see register 3).
2 · Collation of the Variant Translations (six Chinese versions · the weighing-of-merit passage)
Key passage: the merit of giving the seven jewels is much / is-not merit (nature · accumulation) / upholding and teaching to others a four-line verse, the merit surpasses / the buddhas and the bodhi-dharma all issue from and are born of this sūtra / is-not Buddha-dharma
| Version | The weighing-of-merit passage (verbatim excerpt) | [loc] |
|---|---|---|
| Kumārajīva T235 (root) | 「於意云何？若人滿三千大千世界七寶以用布施，是人所得福德，寧為多不？」須菩提言：「甚多，世尊！何以故？是福德即非福德性，是故如來說福德多。」「若復有人，於此經中受持乃至四句偈等，為他人說，其福勝彼。何以故？須菩提！一切諸佛及諸佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提法，皆從此經出。須菩提！所謂佛法者，即非佛法。」 | 0749b18–b25 |
| Bodhiruci T236 | ……是善男子、善女人，所得福德，寧為多不？」須菩提言：「甚多，婆伽婆！甚多，修伽陀！……是福德聚，即非福德聚，是故如來說福德聚、福德聚。」……「若復於此經中，受持乃至四句偈等，為他人說，其福勝彼無量不可數。何以故？……一切諸佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提法，皆從此經出。一切諸佛如來，皆從此經生。須菩提！所謂佛法、佛法者，即非佛法。」 | 0753b24–c05 |
| Paramārtha T237 | ……因此布施生福多不？」須菩提言：「甚多，世尊！甚多，修伽陀！……此福德聚，即非福德聚，是故如來說福德聚。」……「若復有人，從此經中受四句偈，為他正說，顯示其義。此人……所生福德，最多於彼無量無數。何以故？須菩提！如來無上菩提，從此福成。諸佛世尊，從此福生。何以故？須菩提！所言佛法者，即非佛法，是名佛法。」 | 0762c22–0763a05 |
| Dharmagupta T238 | ……「若彼，世尊！福聚；如來說非聚；彼，世尊！如來說福聚、福聚者。」……「若此法本，乃至四句等偈，受已，為他等分別廣說，此，彼緣，多過福聚生，無量、不可數。彼何所因？此出，善實！如來、應、正遍知，無上正遍知；此生佛、世尊。彼何所因？佛法、佛法者，善實！非佛法，如是彼；彼故，說名佛法者。」 | 0767c14–c24 |
| Xuanzang T220⑨ | ……由此因緣所生福聚寧為多不？」善現答言：「甚多！世尊！……何以故？世尊！福德聚福德聚者，如來說為非福德聚，是故如來說名福德聚福德聚。」……「於此法門乃至四句伽他，受持、讀誦、究竟通利，及廣為他宣說、開示、如理作意……所生福聚，甚多於前無量無數。何以故？一切如來、應、正等覺阿耨多羅三藐三菩提皆從此經出，諸佛世尊皆從此經生。所以者何？善現！諸佛法諸佛法者，如來說為非諸佛法，是故如來說名諸佛法諸佛法。」 | 0981a10–a24 |
| Yijing T239 | ……得福多不？」妙生言：「甚多，世尊！何以故？此福聚者，則非是聚，是故如來說為福聚、福聚。」……「若復有人，能於此經乃至一四句頌，若自受持，為他演說……所生福聚，極多於彼無量無數。何以故？妙生！由諸如來無上等覺，從此經出；諸佛世尊，從此經生。是故妙生！佛法者，如來說非佛法，是名佛法。」 | 0772b27–c08 |
What the variants turn on:
- 「福德／福德性／福德聚／福聚」: Kumārajīva has 「福德／即非福德性」 (性 = self-nature, essential nature, pointing to the transmundane nature of merit, see Kuiji's gloss in register 4); Bodhiruci, Paramārtha, Xuanzang, and Dharmagupta have 「福德聚／福聚」, Yijing 「福聚」. This word 「聚」 is marked in Yijing's treatise-text (T1513) for its Sanskrit skandha (塞建陀): 「有其多義，或是聚義，或是肩義，或是分段義……昔人不解梵音，又譯之為趣，深成遼落」
[0877a23–24]— i.e. the divergence between 「福德聚」 and the old renderings of Kumārajīva and Bodhiruci, 「趣／進趣」, turns on the choice between skandha's two senses of "accumulation / shoulder-bearing" (see registers 4 and 5). - The "Able-to-Cut"-lineage repeated phrase: Xuanzang's 「福德聚福德聚者……說名福德聚福德聚」, 「諸佛法諸佛法者……說名諸佛法諸佛法」
[0981a14–15·a23–24], Bodhiruci's 「福德聚、福德聚」「所謂佛法、佛法者」[0753b28·c05], Dharmagupta's 「福聚、福聚者」「佛法、佛法者」[0767c17·c23–24], Yijing's 「福聚、福聚」[0772c01]— the three "Able-to-Cut" lineages (Xuanzang · Yijing · Dharmagupta) and Bodhiruci all have the repeated phrase (the same name raised twice), the "is-not" formula running "X · X — is-not-X — is called X · X"; Kumārajīva and Paramārtha raise it once. The repeated phrase is the textual physiognomy of the Dharmalakṣaṇa-lineage transmissions, recorded verbatim, not compressed. - 「皆從此經出／此經生」: Kumārajīva has only 「皆從此經出」 (one clause); Bodhiruci, Xuanzang, Yijing, and Dharmagupta split it into two clauses — bodhi (the dharma) issues from this sūtra, the buddhas (the Tathāgatas) are born from this sūtra (Bodhiruci 「皆從此經出。一切諸佛如來，皆從此經生」
[0753c04–05]); Paramārtha alone has 「從此福成／從此福生」 (not 「經」 but 「福」, tied to the preceding merit). The division of issuing / being-born is judged by Vasubandhu's treatise as the difference of "manifesting cause (issuing) / producing cause (being-born)" (see register 4). - 「即非佛法」: present in all six versions — Kumārajīva, Paramārtha, and Yijing have 「佛法者，即非佛法，是名佛法」 (Paramārtha and Yijing have the full three-clause form, Kumārajīva stops at 「即非佛法」 without the 「是名」 tail); Bodhiruci 「所謂佛法、佛法者，即非佛法」; Xuanzang 「諸佛法諸佛法者，說為非諸佛法，是故說名諸佛法」; Dharmagupta 「佛法、佛法者，非佛法……說名佛法者」. The application of "is-not" to "Buddha-dharma" is the textual witness of this division turning from "the weighing of merit" into "the dharma's lack of self-nature."
3 · “Is-Not” and the Three Natures (the eye · two "is-not" instances in this division)
This division's "is-not" appears twice: 「是福德即非福德性」 [0749b20–21] and 「所謂佛法者，即非佛法」 [0749b25].
The first, 「福德 — 即非福德性 — （是故說福德多）」: Kumārajīva has no 「是名」 tail, making it a single-marked "is-not." Mapping the three natures:
- 福德 (X) is the dependent-arisen — the contaminated merit produced by the conditions of giving the seven jewels, its event-mark vivid (Kuiji 「財施福能感世間福德多」
[0136a28–29]). - 即非福德性 is the removal of the wholly-imagined — not the "really existent transmundane self-nature of merit" that discrimination clings to (Kuiji 「即非福德性者，謂非是感出世之福德性也」
[0136a25–27]; Asaṅga 「世尊！若福聚，非聚者，此遮增益邊，以無彼福聚分別自性故」[0758c26–27]). - The perfectly-accomplished is embraced implicitly in this division: merit is not nothing (illusory existence of the other-dependent, sayable), only without real self-nature (the perfectly-accomplished, the real), hence 「如來說福德多」 — what is said to be much is a worldly-truth sayable matter (Asaṅga 「雖不如言辭有自性，而有可說事，以如來說福聚故」
[0758c28–0759a01]).
The second, 「（所謂）佛法 — 即非佛法 —（是名佛法）」: Kumārajīva has 「所謂佛法者，即非佛法」 (no 「是名」 tail; Paramārtha and Yijing supply the third clause 「是名佛法」). Mapping the three natures:
- 佛法 (X) is the dependent-arisen — the teaching that may be spoken, may be upheld, may issue from the sūtra (Kuiji 「理智圓明，名為佛法」
[0136b24]). - 即非佛法 is the removal of the wholly-imagined — not the real dharma that discrimination clings to, not shared in common by the remaining ones of the two vehicles (Kuiji 「此唯十方諸佛同得……餘人不得，故即非佛法」
[0136b24–26]; Jizang 「自佛以外，二乘菩薩無有此法，故云即非佛法」[0109a27–28]). - 是名佛法 (Paramārtha · Yijing) is the establishing of the perfectly-accomplished — without self-nature yet sayable as worldly truth (Asaṅga 「是名佛法者，此遮損減邊」
[0759a02–03]; 「為世諦故，如來說名佛法」[0759a06–07]).
The eye of this division: both "is-not"s pivot on "removing self-nature yet retaining the sayable" — removing the wholly-imagined (是-not) without falling into the diminishing extreme (是名), precisely the dynamic of the three natures. The merit weighed, the Buddha-dharma issued, are alike "without real self-nature yet a sayable matter." For this reading mapping "is-not" onto the three natures, see Shi Huijing, The Mapping of the Three-Part "Is-Not" Formula onto the Yogācāra Three Natures (S5-P01); this division is its twofold expression at the position of the weighing of merit.
4 · Variant Readings of the Ancient Masters (merit does not advance toward bodhi · manifesting cause and producing cause · the two extremes · weighted)
Core, weighted — Vasubandhu's Vajracchedikā Treatise in two verses (merit does not advance toward bodhi / regarding the real, named the manifesting cause), in two coexisting Chinese translations: Vasubandhu glosses 「即非福德」 with 「福不趣菩提，二能趣菩提」, and 「皆從此經出生」 with 「於實名了因」, anchoring each to the sūtra-text; the two translations differ in name but are one in meaning.
Vasubandhu T1511 (Bodhiruci's translation) the treatise's verse [0784c29–0785a01]:
「受持法及說，不空於福德；福不趣菩提，二能趣菩提。」
- On 「即非福德聚」: 「彼福德不趣大菩提，二能趣大菩提故。何者為二？一者受持；二者演說。」
[0785a03–06]The accumulation of merit 「有積聚義」 but 「於菩提不能進趣」; upholding and expounding, the two, 「此二能趣大菩提，是故於彼福德中此福為勝」[0785a08–11]. - On 「皆從此經出生」 — the treatise's verse
[0785a17–18]: 「於實名了因，亦為餘生因；唯獨諸佛法，福成第一體。」 「菩提者名為法身，彼體實無為。是故於彼法身，此二能作了因、不能作生因。餘者，受報相好莊嚴……佛於此為生因」[0785a19–22]— "issuing" answers to the dharma-body (what the manifesting cause manifests), "being born" answers to the transformation body (what the producing cause produces).
Vasubandhu T1513 (Yijing's translation) the treatise's stanza [0877a19]:
「福不持菩提，彼二能持故。」
- 「言福於菩提不能持負故，二於菩提是能持故」
[0877a20–21]; the two = self-upholding · teaching to others[0877a21]. - Yijing's collation of the Sanskrit (the distinction of accumulation / advancing)
[0877a23–24]: 「梵云塞建陀，有其多義，或是聚義，或是肩義，或是分段義……此中且據二種，此為昔人不解梵音，又譯之為趣，深成遼落」 — hence merit has the two senses of "accumulation" and "shoulder-bearing," and because it cannot bear bodhi it is named "is-not accumulation"[0877a24–28]. - On 「從此經出生」 — the treatise's stanza
[0877b03]: 「得自性因故，此餘者是生。」 「言菩提者即是法身，此是無為性故，名為自性。是故此二是得彼之因（了因），非是生因。若望此，餘受用化身是生因故」[0877b04–06]. - On 「即非佛法」 — the treatise's stanza
[0877b09]: 「唯是佛法故，能成最勝福。」 「言『如來說為非佛法』者，此顯所覺之法唯佛能證，由不共性是故最勝」[0877b10–11].
〔The two translations matched: merit-does-not-advance / merit-does-not-uphold · manifesting cause / producing cause (issuing / being born) · "merit accomplishes the foremost body" / "able to accomplish the most surpassing merit" — the same Vasubandhu treatise in two Chinese translations, differing in name, one in meaning.〕
Asaṅga T1510 (Dharmagupta's translation): this division is, within the abode "desiring to attain the dharma-body," the dharma-body of the mark of merit — 「證得法身亦有二種，謂智相、福相……為欲得福相法身故，經言『若此三千大千世界』」 [0757b24–c02]. "Is-not Buddha-dharma" is judged as "not lost · parting from the two extremes": 「『如來說非佛法』者，此遮增益邊。『是名佛法』者，此遮損減邊」 [0759a01–03]; 「如來說非佛法者，顯示不共義。是名佛法者，顯示相應義」 [0759a03–04]; the merit-accumulation clause likewise 「『若福聚，非聚』者，此遮增益邊，以無彼福聚分別自性故」 [0758c26–27].
Jizang (Three-Treatise) T1699: he sections it as "raising external giving for the weighing" [0108a15–16]. On 「即非福德」 following the treatise: 「論云『福不趣菩提』，此簡布施之福雖多，此是有漏福德，即非福德者，非無漏無所得福德也」 [0108c04–06]; 「論經重言『福德福德』……福德凡有二種：一者、有漏福德；二者、無漏福德」 [0108c06–08] (also glossing Bodhiruci's repeated phrase). On 「即非佛法」 following the treatise's verse 「唯獨諸佛法，福成第一體」 [0109a25–26]: 「所言佛法者，唯佛是無上菩提之法也。即非佛法者，自佛以外，二乘菩薩無有此法，故云即非佛法也」 [0109a26–28].
Zhiyi (Tiantai) T1698: 「『三千七寶』下，校量……積寶多而功薄，四句約而福厚……七寶是事善、緣因，天人果報不動不出，故以動出之慧導之得成菩提，一念圓信能導眾善，此心為勝，實相能出諸法，法即非法，諸法不生般若生也」 [0078b17–25] — with the single phrase 「實相出諸法·法即非法」 he runs through both "is-not Buddha-dharma" and "issuing from this sūtra."
Kuiji (Yogācāra) T1700: he sections it as the "first of the fourfold weighing" [0133a01–03], in each passage 「初三破疑，第四正校量」 [0133a13–14]. On 「即非福德性」: 「謂非是感出世之福德性也，謂要聽聞發生無分別智，方得出世無相果故」 [0136a26–27]; citing the treatise 「如來說福德性，即非福德性者，此遮增益邊，以無彼福聚分別」 [0128a06–08]. On 「從此經出」: 「謂由因聽聞此經故……引無分別智，契會真智圓滿故，從此生理……名之為出」 [0136b16–19]; 「一切諸佛者，報、化二佛從此經生也。及諸佛阿耨菩提者，諸法身佛從此經出也。論云『於實名了因』者，謂於無為實相了因所得也」 [0136b19–21]. On 「即非佛法」: 「以無分別智契證真理，理智圓明，名為佛法。此唯十方諸佛同得，名為佛法；餘人不得，故即非佛法」 [0136b23–26].
The three ancient-master streams (Three-Treatise · Tiantai · Yogācāra) in this division all return to Vasubandhu's two verses: is-not merit = merit does not advance toward bodhi (contaminated merit cannot advance toward / bear great bodhi, the two uncontaminated practices can advance); all issue from and are born of this sūtra = manifesting cause (issuing · manifesting the dharma-body) / producing cause (being born · accomplishing the transformation body); is-not Buddha-dharma = only the Buddha realizes it not in common (the remaining ones do not attain it). The eye of the weighing turns "the muchness of merit" into the reverse-revealing of "the dharma without self-nature, from which the buddhas issue and are born" — this is the ancient masters' settled reading of "born of the dharma" in this division.
5 · Terminology
福德性／福德聚／福聚 puṇya-skandha (聚 = skandha; Yijing's treatise marks 「塞建陀」 for its three senses "accumulation · shoulder · segment," the old rendering 「趣」 being the taking of the one sense "advancing," 「深成遼落」 [0877a23–24]; Kumārajīva has 「福德性」, taking the sense of self-nature · essential nature) ·
七寶 sapta-ratna ·
四句偈 catuṣpadikā gāthā (Kuiji 「明此宗義之處義圓足者，即為一句」 [0136b05–06]) ·
了因／生因 jñāpaka-hetu / kāraka-hetu (Vasubandhu: the manifesting cause manifests the dharma-body 〔issuing〕 · the producing cause accomplishes the transformation body 〔being born〕 T1511 0785a19–22) ·
佛法 buddha-dharma (Asaṅga 「攝波羅蜜事及念處等菩提分」 [0759a08–09]; Kuiji 「理智圓明……唯十方諸佛同得」 [0136b24–25]) ·
有漏／無漏福德 sāsrava / anāsrava puṇya (Jizang judges 「即非福德＝有漏福德，非無漏無所得福德」 [0108c10–11]). 〔Sanskrit as a pronunciation aid; for the multiple senses of skandha in 「聚」, see Yijing's collation of the Sanskrit in registers 2 and 4.〕
6 · Simile and Rhetoric (the weighing-structure · merit revealing in reverse)
This division has no concrete simile (the empty-space simile is in division 4, the Sumeru simile in division 11). The point of the rhetoric lies in the overturning of the weighing: first the merit of giving is stated to the extreme (the seven jewels filling the three-thousandfold great-thousand world, 「甚多」), and just at the summit of muchness it abruptly turns to "upholding and teaching to others a four-line verse, that merit surpasses it" — using the muchness of the measurable (the seven jewels) to reveal in reverse the surpassing of the immeasurable (upholding the sūtra) — then closing with 「皆從此經出生」 upon the root of the buddhas. Vasubandhu judges this as the "simile-weighing of the surpassing merit" [0784c27] (Bodhiruci's treatise) — the weighing is itself a rhetorical figure: setting the accumulation of merit (measurable) against the dharma's capacity to advance (immeasurable), the much becomes, in reverse, the foil, and no-attainment becomes, in reverse, the surpassing. Zhiyi's 「積寶多而功薄，四句約而福厚」 [0078b19] is precisely the apt verdict of this contrast. This "weighing-structure" recurs and circles through the four merit-weighing divisions (8 · 11 · 15 · 24), all revealing no-attainment in reverse through merit. This register, in this division, shows its rhetoric through "the weighing"; the concrete simile is heavy in divisions 4 · 26 · 32.
7 · Cross-Reading
- Thirty Verses (T1586): the two emptinesses · the transformation of the basis (v. 29, the perfectly-accomplished) · what the manifesting cause of the perfectly-accomplished manifests — the treatise-text counterpart of this division's "the buddhas' bodhi-dharma (dharma-body) issues from this sūtra · attained by the manifesting cause."
- Mahāyāna-saṃgraha (T1594): the chapter on the wisdom-fruit · the dharma-body (the three bodies: self-nature / enjoyment / transformation) — the treatise-text of Vasubandhu's "the manifesting cause manifests the dharma-body 〔issuing〕 · the producing cause accomplishes the transformation body 〔being born〕."
- Cheng weishi lun (T1585): the dharma-body · manifesting cause and producing cause (unconditioned suchness is not produced by a producing cause, but only manifested by a manifesting cause) · uncontaminated seeds — the treatise-text technical vocabulary of this division's "is-not the nature of merit · uncontaminated merit of no-attainment · issuing from this sūtra."
- Heart Sūtra (T251): 「無智亦無得」 — this division's "is-not Buddha-dharma · what is called Buddha-dharma is is-not Buddha-dharma" is the dharma-position of "no-attainment" (Buddha-dharma without real self-nature attainable is precisely Buddha-dharma).
This division's "is-not the nature of merit · is-not Buddha-dharma · issuing from and born of this sūtra" is the scriptural counterpart of the Thirty Verses' and Cheng weishi lun's "uncontaminated merit · manifesting cause and producing cause · dharma-body"; "is-not Buddha-dharma" is the dharma-position of the Heart Sūtra's "no-attainment." Shi Huijing's thesis "the Diamond Sūtra says in scriptural language what the Cheng weishi lun says in technical language" 〔drawn from From the Hundred Dharmas to the Diamond, S5-P10〕: the single phrase "is-not Buddha-dharma" in the Diamond Sūtra, Vasubandhu's treatise says of the very same matter in the technical language of "merit does not advance toward bodhi · the two can advance toward bodhi · manifesting cause / producing cause." 〔Convention: list only what is genuinely pertinent; no forced pegging — linkage, not padding. The Madhyānta-vibhāga has no frontal counterpart in this division; omitted.〕
8 · East–West Observation (Western perspective · observation, not adjudication)
- 「即非福德性」, merit revealing no-attainment in reverse ↔ Western axiology's distinction of "instrumental good / intrinsic good" (the value of a means against the value of an end in itself): the West largely reads it as the value-hierarchy "the merit of giving is an instrumental good, prajñā an intrinsic good"; the ancient-master / Yogācāra reading is the dynamic of the three natures — merit is not nothing (the other-dependent, sayable), only without real self-nature (removing the wholly-imagined), and "not advancing toward bodhi" is not inferior to prajñā but a difference of constitution, having accumulation yet unable to advance (Vasubandhu 「積聚義／進趣義」), a turning of essential nature, not a high-or-low ranking of value.
- 「皆從此經出生」 (the buddhas born of the sūtra) ↔ Western philosophy of religion's "scripture as the source of the sacred," deconstruction's "textuality" (text as that from which meaning issues): the West may read it either as the religious-sociological phenomenon of "the sacralizing of scripture" or as the linguistic-philosophical "text generating meaning"; the ancient masters judge it as the strict distinction "manifesting cause / producing cause" — the sūtra does not "produce" the dharma-body (the dharma-body is unconditioned, not something produced) but "manifests" it; only the transformation body is "produced" by the sūtra. The distinction of issuing / being-born is not the single-valued "textual generation" of the West, but the dynamic of the two causes of manifesting / producing in Yogācāra.
- 「即非佛法」, Buddha-dharma without self-nature ↔ Western dialetheism (Priest, Garfield on Buddhist "is-not") and negative theology (Buddha-dharma cannot be clung to as real per its words, near via negativa): the West largely reads "is-not" as a static logical paradox or pure negation; the Yogācāra reads it as the twofold negation "removing the augmenting extreme (是-not) · removing the diminishing extreme (是名)" (Asaṅga's two-extremes doctrine) — removing self-nature yet retaining the sayable, not pure negation, but the perfectly-accomplished manifested by the transformation of the basis. This difference between East and West is itself one note worth marking.
- The weighing-structure (the seven jewels against the four-line verse) ↔ the West's utilitarian / deontological weighing, the incommensurability thesis: one may set them beside; yet the aim of the weighing is not "which is greater in quantity" but "using the measurable to reveal in reverse the immeasurable" — the weighing of merit is itself a skillful means for breaking the clinging to merit, not a weighing of two goods.
- (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 [0749b18–b25] (root · Born of the Dharma). The six versions' weighing-of-merit passage [loc] is in register 2: Bodhiruci T0236a [0753b24–c05] · Paramārtha T0237 [0762c22–0763a05] · Dharmagupta T0238 [0767c14–c24] · Xuanzang T220⑨ [0981a10–a24] · Yijing T0239 [0772b27–c08]. Treatise texts (Vasubandhu's two verses · Asaṅga's dharma-body of the mark of merit): Vasubandhu T1511 [0784c27–0785a25] · Vasubandhu T1513 [0877a17–b12] · Asaṅga T1510a [0757b24–c02·0758c23–0759a09]. Ancient masters: Jizang T1699 [0108a15–0109b01] · Zhiyi T1698 [0078b17–b25] · Kuiji T1700 [0128a06–08·0133a01–14·0136a23–b26].
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 8 · Born of the Dharma · apparatus · Spring 2026