金剛般若波羅蜜經 分九 一相無相分
從須陀洹到阿羅漢，佛把四個果位一路問下來，問的都是同一句：他能不能起「我得了這個果」的念頭？答的也都是同一個「不也」。入流而其實無所入，一往來而其實無往來，到阿羅漢，連可名之法都說無——果名只是隨緣安立的一個稱呼，名上並沒有一個實在的「果」可得。要緊的是那一念：一旦起了「我證得了」的念頭，就已落回「我、人、眾生、壽者」的執裡——古德說，這是最細的一層慢，叫「我得慢」。所以須菩提雖被佛稱作無諍第一、離欲第一，自己卻不肯存「我是離欲阿羅漢」這個念；正因「實無所行」，才稱得上樂於寂靜之行。果證愈是到了極處，那「我得、我行」之念反而愈是了無可得。證，從來不在「得了什麼」上；證，正在無一法可得、也無一個「得者」可立之處。
From the stream-enterer (srotāpanna) up to the arhat, the Buddha questions the four fruits one by one, and the question is always the same: can such a one give rise to the thought, "I have attained this fruit"? And the answer is always the same—「不也」(no). To enter the stream is in truth to enter nothing; the once-returner in truth comes and goes nowhere; and at the stage of arhat, there is said to be not even a dharma that can be named—the fruit's name is only a designation set up to suit conditions, and behind the name there is no real "fruit" to be attained. What matters is that one thought: the instant "I have realized it" arises, one has already fallen back into the grasping of 「我、人、眾生、壽者」(self, person, being, life-span)—and the ancient masters say this is the subtlest layer of conceit, called the "conceit of attainment" (我得慢). So although the Buddha calls Subhūti foremost in non-contention and foremost in freedom from desire, Subhūti himself will not harbor the thought "I am an arhat free of desire"; precisely because 「實無所行」(in truth there is nothing practiced) can he be called one who delights in the practice of quietude. The further realization of the fruit reaches its utmost, the more the thought of "I attain, I practice" turns out to have nothing to grasp. Realization was never about "what has been attained"; realization lies exactly where not one dharma can be attained, and no "attainer" can be set up at all.
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 9 · One Mark, No Mark · essence · Spring 2026
〔一〕須陀洹——入流而無所入
經曰：
「須菩提！於意云何？須陀洹能作是念，『我得須陀洹果』不？」須菩提言：「不也，世尊！何以故？須陀洹名為入流，而無所入，不入色、聲、香、味、觸、法，是名須陀洹。」
「須菩提！你怎麼想？一位須陀洹，能不能起這樣的念頭：『我得到了須陀洹這個果位』呢？」須菩提回答：「不能的，世尊！為什麼這樣說呢？所謂須陀洹，名字叫作「入流」，可是他其實並沒有入到一個什麼地方去——他不入色、不入聲、香、味、觸、法這六塵，只是假借這個名字叫作須陀洹罷了。」
〔二〕斯陀含、阿那含——名往來不來而實無往來無來
經曰：
「須菩提！於意云何？斯陀含能作是念，『我得斯陀含果』不？」須菩提言：「不也，世尊！何以故？斯陀含名一往來，而實無往來，是名斯陀含。」「須菩提！於意云何？阿那含能作是念，『我得阿那含果』不？」須菩提言：「不也，世尊！何以故？阿那含名為不來，而實無來，是故名阿那含。」
「須菩提！你怎麼想？一位斯陀含，能不能起這樣的念頭：『我得到了斯陀含這個果位』呢？」須菩提回答：「不能的，世尊！為什麼這樣說呢？所謂斯陀含，名字叫作「一往來」，可是他其實並沒有一個真實的往來，只是假借這個名字叫作斯陀含罷了。」「須菩提！你怎麼想？一位阿那含，能不能起這樣的念頭：『我得到了阿那含這個果位』呢？」須菩提回答：「不能的，世尊！為什麼這樣說呢？所謂阿那含，名字叫作「不來」，可是他其實並沒有一個真實的來，所以才叫作阿那含。」
〔三〕阿羅漢——實無有法名，作得念即著四相
經曰：
「須菩提！於意云何？阿羅漢能作是念，『我得阿羅漢道』不？」須菩提言：「不也，世尊！何以故？實無有法名阿羅漢。世尊！若阿羅漢作是念『我得阿羅漢道』，即為著我、人、眾生、壽者。
「須菩提！你怎麼想？一位阿羅漢，能不能起這樣的念頭：『我得到了阿羅漢這個道果』呢？」須菩提回答：「不能的，世尊！為什麼這樣說呢？因為實在沒有一個東西可以叫作「阿羅漢」。世尊！倘若一位阿羅漢起了這樣的念頭：『我得到了阿羅漢道』，那麼他就已經執著在「我、人、眾生、壽者」這四種相上了。」
〔四〕無諍第一·實無所行，乃名樂阿蘭那行
經曰：
世尊！佛說我得無諍三昧人中最為第一，是第一離欲阿羅漢。我不作是念：『我是離欲阿羅漢。』世尊！我若作是念『我得阿羅漢道』，世尊則不說須菩提是樂阿蘭那行者。以須菩提實無所行，而名須菩提是樂阿蘭那行。」
「世尊！佛曾說我已得「無諍三昧」、在眾人之中最為第一，是第一位離了貪欲的阿羅漢。可是我自己並不起這樣的念頭：『我是個離了欲的阿羅漢。』世尊！我倘若起了這樣的念頭：『我得到了阿羅漢道』，那麼世尊就不會說須菩提是個樂於修寂靜行的人了。正因為須菩提其實並沒有一個「我在行什麼」的行可執，所以才說須菩提是個樂於寂靜行的人。」
〔1〕Srotaāpanna — entering the stream, yet entering nothing
The sūtra says:
「須菩提！於意云何？須陀洹能作是念，『我得須陀洹果』不？」須菩提言：「不也，世尊！何以故？須陀洹名為入流，而無所入，不入色、聲、香、味、觸、法，是名須陀洹。」
"Subhūti, what do you think — can a srotaāpanna have the thought, 'I have gained the fruit of srotaāpanna'?" Subhūti answered: "No, World-Honored One! Why is this said? A srotaāpanna is called 'stream-enterer,' yet in fact he has entered nowhere at all — he does not enter into sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, or mental objects, these six dusts; it is only by borrowing this name that he is called a srotaāpanna."
〔2〕Sakṛdāgāmin, anāgāmin — named 'once more' and 'no-coming,' yet with no real coming or going
The sūtra says:
「須菩提！於意云何？斯陀含能作是念，『我得斯陀含果』不？」須菩提言：「不也，世尊！何以故？斯陀含名一往來，而實無往來，是名斯陀含。」「須菩提！於意云何？阿那含能作是念，『我得阿那含果』不？」須菩提言：「不也，世尊！何以故？阿那含名為不來，而實無來，是故名阿那含。」
"Subhūti, what do you think — can a sakṛdāgāmin have the thought, 'I have gained the fruit of sakṛdāgāmin'?" Subhūti answered: "No, World-Honored One! Why is this said? A sakṛdāgāmin is called 'once-returner,' yet in fact there is no real going and coming for him; it is only by borrowing this name that he is called a sakṛdāgāmin." "Subhūti, what do you think — can an anāgāmin have the thought, 'I have gained the fruit of anāgāmin'?" Subhūti answered: "No, World-Honored One! Why is this said? An anāgāmin is called 'non-returner,' yet in fact there is no real coming for him, and that is why he is called an anāgāmin."
〔3〕Arhat — in truth there is no such thing as the name; to take the thought is to cling to the four marks
The sūtra says:
「須菩提！於意云何？阿羅漢能作是念，『我得阿羅漢道』不？」須菩提言：「不也，世尊！何以故？實無有法名阿羅漢。世尊！若阿羅漢作是念『我得阿羅漢道』，即為著我、人、眾生、壽者。
"Subhūti, what do you think — can an arhat have the thought, 'I have gained the way of the arhat'?" Subhūti answered: "No, World-Honored One! Why is this said? Because in truth there is no real thing that can be called 'arhat.' World-Honored One, if an arhat were to have the thought, 'I have gained the way of the arhat,' then he would already be clinging to the four marks of self, person, being, and life-span."
〔4〕Foremost in non-contention · with nothing really practiced, hence called one who delights in the practice of stillness
The sūtra says:
世尊！佛說我得無諍三昧人中最為第一，是第一離欲阿羅漢。我不作是念：『我是離欲阿羅漢。』世尊！我若作是念『我得阿羅漢道』，世尊則不說須菩提是樂阿蘭那行者。以須菩提實無所行，而名須菩提是樂阿蘭那行。」
"World-Honored One, the Buddha has said that I have attained the samādhi of non-contention, and am foremost among all people — the first among arhats free of desire. Yet I do not have the thought, 'I am an arhat free of desire.' World-Honored One, if I were to have the thought, 'I have gained the way of the arhat,' then the World-Honored One would not say that Subhūti is one who delights in the practice of stillness. It is just because Subhūti in truth has no 'practice that I am practicing' to cling to that he is called one who delights in the practice of stillness."
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 9 · One Mark, No Mark · vernacular · Spring 2026
拿依他起的「假名」、遍計所執的「我得之執」、以及離障的修證，來照金剛經這一段「名X而無Y、是名X」的問答。
本分的眼：四果都不作「我得果」之念
這一分接著前一分而來。前面說「一切賢聖皆以無為法而有差別」——聖人是靠證得無為（不生不滅的真理）而立的名。話一落下，便起一個疑：若諸法不可取、不可說、無依無得，那四果聖人怎麼還取證自己的果、怎麼還說「我得果」？古德三家同把這一分判作「釋成格量」——回過頭來把上文的較量說圓（吉藏「釋成格量之義」、窺基「約二乘以生疑，前說一切聖人以無為法得名，何故預流等云我能取自果」、世親「若須陀洹等聖人取自果，云何言彼法不可取」）。
本分的答法，是把須陀洹到阿羅漢四個果位一路問下來，問的都是同一句：他能不能起「我得某某果」的念頭？答的也都是同一個「不也」。佛是用四果不作得念，來答上文那個疑：果證是真的，但果上並沒有一個「我得」的實事可執。
要先說明的是：這一分沒有「X——即非X——是名X」那種三段的「即非」全式，而是換了一個樣子——「名X，而無Y，是名X」（須陀洹「名為入流，而無所入」、斯陀含「名一往來，而實無往來」、阿那含「名為不來，而實無來」）。它說的不是「即非」，是「無得」。用唯識的眼看，這個「無得」分得很清楚。
果名是假名：依他起的施設
先看果的「名」。須陀洹、斯陀含、阿那含、阿羅漢這些果名是怎麼立的？唯識說，凡是隨世俗、依緣而安立的名，都是依他起——依靠眾多條件而現起的假相，不是名外另有一個實在的東西叫這個名。果名也一樣：它是隨著聖人證入無為、隨世諦而為他安立的一個稱呼（窺基「但為其立名稱曰預流」）。所以「須陀洹」這個名宛然可說，但「名」就只是名。
吉藏與窺基都點出「入流」這個名裡藏著雙關。「流」有兩種：一是生死之流（就是煩惱），一是道流、出世之流（就是正觀、正道）。所以「入流」其實同時說了兩面：入的是出世的道流，逆的是生死的煩惱流（吉藏「名為入流，即是入於道流；不入色、聲、香、味觸法即是逆生死流」；窺基「若望生死即是逆流，若望出世便是預流」）。一個果名，兩重意思都假立在裡頭。
「無所入·實無往來」是遣執：遍計所執無體
再看「而無所入、而實無往來、而實無來」這一截——這正是遣執的地方。
須陀洹名為入流，卻「不入色聲香味觸法」、「無所入」。唯識說，凡夫總要在這名相上妄加一層：以為真有一個實在的「我」、真有一個實在的「果」或「境」可入、可至、可得——這一層妄計，就是遍計所執（把心所變現的影，當成心外實有的東西）。本分這一連串「而無……」，遣的就是這一層：證真理之時，只是默默契合那個理，並沒有趣向、入到某個色聲香等實境裡去（窺基「正證真理之時但冥契理，而不入色聲等法」）。果證宛然，而「實有一法可入可得」的妄執本來就無體——這正是般若「無所入」一句所空的東西。
智顗讀這一截，落在「在觀」二字上：須陀洹的「不入色塵」是逆生死流，可是真正論到證真之時，是「無逆無入」——連「逆」、連「入」這樣的對待相也都息了（智顗「至論在觀，無逆無入」）。斯陀含「實無往來」，是因為已得人、法二空（智顗「已得生、法二空故」）；阿那含「實無來」，智顗說這是省文，「不來」本含「無來」，互文見義（智顗「略以無兼不，互文現耳」）。一路下來，名是假立的依他，「無」是遣盡的遍計。
「實無有法名阿羅漢」與不作「我得」念：破我執·破我得慢
到阿羅漢，遣得最徹底，逕說「實無有法名阿羅漢」——連可名之法都無實。隨即點出關竅：「若阿羅漢作是念『我得阿羅漢道』，即為著我、人、眾生、壽者。」一起「我得」之念，就落回四相的我執了。
唯識把這一念看得很細。世親說，聖人若起「我能得果」這樣的心，就是著我等；這之所以可能，是因為還有隨眠未盡——不是現行的粗煩惱，而是潛伏的煩惱種子（隨眠）（世親「以有使煩惱、非行煩惱」；義淨譯逕標「意說有隨眠惑，非是現行」）。所以「我得果」之執，是一種極細的我得慢——窺基一句點破：「我是預流等，故名之為慢」：心裡存一個「我是個證了果的人」，這就是慢。本分屬全經前半（破我相、淨人我執），而它要破的，正是這藏在果證背後、最細的一層「我得」之我執。無著也正把這一段判作十八住裡的「於修道得勝中無慢」、十二離障的頭一個「離慢」——對治的就是這個「我得果」的我得慢（無著「為離慢故……顯示對治我得慢」、「若有我想，則為有慢」）。
窺基還用唯識細分了四果的不同：前三果出了定觀，這「我得」的慢還可能起來；唯獨第四果阿羅漢，煩惱已經斷得乾乾淨淨，再不會起這個慢——可是「所知障」這一層還容許起（窺基「前三果出觀容起，第四果者煩惱定無，所知容起也」）。這一句留了個伏線：聲聞把煩惱障斷盡了，所知障卻還在——這正通向後文（從究竟無我分起）「破法執、斷所知障」的後半。
無諍第一·實無所行：離二障的證境
須菩提接著以自己作證。佛說他得「無諍三昧」、人中第一、是第一離欲阿羅漢；可是他偏偏不起「我是離欲阿羅漢」這個念。倘若他起了「我得阿羅漢道」之念，佛就不會說他是「樂阿蘭那行」（樂於寂靜無事之行）的人了。正因為他「實無所行」——沒有一個「我在行什麼」的執——才稱得上樂寂靜行。
「無諍」這個詞，唯識／古德不讀作「不跟人爭辯」那種態度，而讀作離二障的證境。世親說，無諍是離了兩種障：一是煩惱障，二是定障（三昧障）（世親「二種障者：一者煩惱障；二者三昧障。離彼二障，故言無所行」；義淨譯作「煩惱障·定障」，名異義一）。吉藏、窺基同此讀：吉藏「斷煩惱故得羅漢，斷三昧鄣得無諍定」；窺基說須菩提之所以稱「第一離欲」，是因為他煩惱障、定障都離了，是「俱解脫」，不同於只斷煩惱障的「慧解脫」（窺基「能離煩惱障及定障故……以是俱解脫，故不同慧解脫但離煩惱障也」）。
所以「實無所行」不是無所作為，是離了二障、二取淨盡之後，心無一個可執的「能行、所行」——這正是無得在修證上的樣子：果證到極處，反而「我得」之念、「我行」之執愈是了無可得。
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——唯識的二空、二障、無得之說，自有其經源（解深密、瑜伽）與論本（三十頌、二十論、成唯識），般若另是一系；而是同一「證而無得」的實相，金剛經以經語（不作得念·實無所行）說，唯識以論語（依他假名·遣遍計·斷二障·無得）說，兩相對照，其義益顯。三十頌以「無所得」住唯識性，與本分四果「實無有法可得」相應；二十論明唯識無境，四果「不入色聲香味觸法」正是六塵無實、境空之說；成唯識論說煩惱障、所知障別斷（窺基「第四果煩惱定無、所知容起」即此二障別斷之先聲），與「我得果」之分別我執、無諍之離二障相印；般若一系的心經「無智亦無得」「以無所得故」，與本分「實無所行」同一無得之門。一句收束：金剛經以經語說的「四果不作得念、實無所行」，成唯識論以「二障別斷·我執·無所得」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 “provisional name” of 依他起 (paratantra), the “clinging to ‘I have attained’” of 遍計所執 (parikalpita), and the realization that leaves the hindrances, to reflect this division’s question-and-answer of “named X yet without Y, is named X.”
The Eye of This Division: None of the Four Fruits Makes the Thought “I Have Attained the Fruit”
This division comes carried from the previous one. Before, it said 「一切賢聖皆以無為法而有差別」, all the worthies and sages differ by the unconditioned dharma — the sages are established in name by realizing the unconditioned (the unarising, unceasing truth). The words no sooner fall than a doubt arises: if dharmas are ungraspable, unsayable, without reliance and without attainment, how do the sages of the four fruits still grasp and realize their own fruit, still say “I have attained the fruit”? The three masters all judge this division as “bringing the weighing to completion” (釋成格量) — turning back to round out the foregoing weighing (Jizang: 「釋成格量之義」, completing the meaning of the weighing; Kuiji: 「約二乘以生疑，前說一切聖人以無為法得名，何故預流等云我能取自果」, raising the doubt through the two vehicles — the foregoing said all sages are named by the unconditioned, why then do the stream-enterer and the rest say “I can grasp my own fruit”; Vasubandhu: 「若須陀洹等聖人取自果，云何言彼法不可取」, if the sages such as the stream-enterer grasp their own fruit, how is it said that dharma is ungraspable).
The way this division answers is to ask down through the four fruits, from stream-enterer to arhat, each with the same one question: can he give rise to the thought “I have attained such-and-such a fruit”? And the answer is each time the same “No.” The Buddha uses the four fruits’ not making the thought of attainment to answer that foregoing doubt: the fruit-realization is real, but upon the fruit there is no real matter of “I have attained” to be clung.
It must first be stated that this division has no full three-phrase “is-not” form of “X — is-not X — is named X,” but takes on another shape — “named X, yet without Y, is named X” (the stream-enterer 「名為入流，而無所入」, named “entering the stream” yet entering nowhere; the once-returner 「名一往來，而實無往來」, named “once coming and going” yet in truth no coming and going; the non-returner 「名為不來，而實無來」, named “not coming” yet in truth no coming). What it states is not “is-not” but “nothing attained” (無得). Seen through the Yogācāra eye, this “nothing attained” divides perfectly clear.
The Fruit-Name Is a Provisional Name: the Establishing of 依他起
First, the “name” of the fruit. How are the fruit-names stream-enterer, once-returner, non-returner, and arhat set up? Yogācāra says: whatever name is set up following the conventional, in reliance on conditions, is 依他起 — a provisional mark arising in reliance on a manifold of conditions, not that outside the name there is some other real thing called by this name. The fruit-name is the same: it is a designation set up for him following his realization-entry into the unconditioned, following conventional truth (Kuiji: 「但為其立名稱曰預流」, only setting up the name for him, called stream-enterer). So “stream-enterer” is a name vividly sayable, but the “name” is just a name.
Both Jizang and Kuiji point out that this name “entering the stream” (入流) holds a double sense. “Stream” (流) is of two kinds: one is the stream of birth-and-death (that is, the defilements), the other the stream of the path, the supramundane stream (that is, right contemplation, the right path). So “entering the stream” in fact states both faces at once: what is entered is the supramundane stream of the path, what is gone against is the stream of the defilements of birth-and-death (Jizang: 「名為入流，即是入於道流；不入色、聲、香、味觸法即是逆生死流」, named “entering the stream” is entering the stream of the path; not entering form, sound, scent, taste, touch, dharma is going against the stream of birth-and-death; Kuiji: 「若望生死即是逆流，若望出世便是預流」, regarded toward birth-and-death it is going against the stream, regarded toward the supramundane it is entering the stream). One fruit-name, both senses provisionally set within it.
“Entering Nowhere · In Truth No Coming and Going” Is Removing Clinging: 遍計所執 Has No Substance
Now the stretch “yet entering nowhere · yet in truth no coming and going · yet in truth no coming” — this is precisely the place of removing clinging.
The stream-enterer is named “entering the stream,” yet 「不入色聲香味觸法」, does not enter form, sound, scent, taste, touch, dharma, 「無所入」, enters nowhere. Yogācāra says the ordinary person always must add a layer upon these names-and-marks: supposing there really is a real “self,” really a real “fruit” or “realm” to be entered, reached, or attained — and this layer of deluded reckoning is 遍計所執 (taking the reflection transformed by mind for a thing really existing outside the mind). This division’s string of “yet without…” removes exactly this layer: at the time of realizing the true principle, one only silently accords with that principle, and does not head toward, or enter into, any real realm of form, sound, scent, and the like (Kuiji: 「正證真理之時但冥契理，而不入色聲等法」, at the time of rightly realizing the true principle one only silently accords with the principle and does not enter the dharmas of form, sound, and so on). The fruit-realization is vivid, yet the deluded clinging of “there really is a dharma to be entered and attained” has from the first no substance — exactly the thing that the prajñā phrase “entering nowhere” empties.
Zhiyi reads this stretch, landing on the two words “in contemplation” (在觀): the stream-enterer’s “not entering the form-dust” is going against the stream of birth-and-death, but truly come to the time of realizing the real, it is 「無逆無入」, without going-against and without entering — even the opposing marks of “going-against” and “entering” are stilled (Zhiyi: 「至論在觀，無逆無入」, come to discuss it in contemplation, there is no going-against and no entering). The once-returner’s “in truth no coming and going” is because he has already attained the two emptinesses of person and dharmas (Zhiyi: 「已得生、法二空故」, because he has already attained the two emptinesses of being and dharmas); the non-returner’s “in truth no coming,” Zhiyi says, is abbreviated text — “not coming” already contains “no coming,” the senses seen across each other (Zhiyi: 「略以無兼不，互文現耳」, abbreviating, “no” covers “not,” the cross-text showing it). All the way down, the name is the provisionally-set other-dependent, and the “no” is the removed-clean wholly-imagined.
“In Truth No Dharma Named Arhat” and Not Making the Thought “I Have Attained”: Breaking the Clinging to Self · Breaking the Conceit of “I Have Attained”
Come to the arhat, it is removed most thoroughly, stating directly 「實無有法名阿羅漢」, in truth there is no dharma named arhat — even the nameable dharma has no reality. At once it points out the pivot: 「若阿羅漢作是念『我得阿羅漢道』，即為著我、人、眾生、壽者」, if an arhat makes the thought “I have attained the arhat-path,” he then clings to self, person, being, life-span. Once the thought “I have attained” arises, one falls back into the clinging to self of the four marks.
Yogācāra sees this single thought very finely. Vasubandhu says: if the sage gives rise to such a mind as “I can attain the fruit,” this is clinging to self and the rest; and this is possible because there are still latent dispositions not yet exhausted — not the active coarse defilements, but the latent defilement-seeds (the latent dispositions, 隨眠) (Vasubandhu: 「以有使煩惱、非行煩惱」, because there are latent-disposition defilements, not active defilements; Yijing’s version marks directly 「意說有隨眠惑，非是現行」, the sense is that there are latent-disposition delusions, not the active). So the clinging of “I have attained the fruit” is an extremely subtle conceit of “I have attained” (我得慢) — Kuiji points it out in a word: 「我是預流等，故名之為慢」 (“I am a stream-enterer” and so on, therefore it is called conceit): harboring within “I am a person who has realized the fruit” — this is conceit. This division belongs to the first half of the whole sūtra (breaking the mark of self, purifying the clinging to a personal self), and what it would break is precisely this subtlest layer of “I have attained” clinging-to-self hidden behind the fruit-realization. Asaṅga too judges this passage as “no conceit in the excellence attained on the path of cultivation” (於修道得勝中無慢) among the eighteen abodes, and the first of the twelve leavings-of-hindrance, “leaving conceit” (離慢) — what it counters is just this conceit of “I have attained the fruit” (Asaṅga: 「為離慢故……顯示對治我得慢」, for the sake of leaving conceit… displaying the counter to the conceit of “I have attained”; 「若有我想，則為有慢」, if there is the thought of self, there is conceit).
Kuiji further, by Yogācāra, finely distinguishes the four fruits: the first three fruits, coming out of meditative contemplation, may still give rise to this “I have attained” conceit; the fourth fruit, the arhat alone, having cut the defilements clean, will no more give rise to this conceit — yet the layer of the 所知障 is still allowed to arise (Kuiji: 「前三果出觀容起，第四果者煩惱定無，所知容起也」, the first three fruits coming out of contemplation may give rise to it, the fourth fruit certainly without defilement, the knowable may yet arise). This line leaves a hidden thread: the śrāvaka has cut the 煩惱障 clean, yet the 所知障 still remains — and this leads straight on to the latter half (from the division “Ultimately, No Self” onward) of “breaking the dharma-clinging, cutting off the 所知障.”
Foremost in Non-Contention · In Truth Nothing Practiced: the Realized State That Leaves the Two Hindrances
Subhūti then takes himself as witness. The Buddha says he attains the “samādhi of non-contention” (無諍三昧), is foremost among men, is the foremost arhat free of desire; yet he precisely does not give rise to the thought “I am an arhat free of desire.” Had he given rise to the thought “I have attained the arhat-path,” the Buddha would not have said he is one who 「樂阿蘭那行」, delights in the practice of araṇā (the practice of quiet, free of affairs). It is exactly because he 「實無所行」, in truth practices nothing — has no clinging of “I am practicing something” — that he merits being called one who delights in the practice of quiet.
The word “non-contention” (無諍) Yogācāra and the ancient masters read not as that attitude of “not disputing with others,” but as the realized state that leaves the two hindrances. Vasubandhu says non-contention is the leaving of two hindrances: one the 煩惱障, the other the samādhi-hindrance (定障) (Vasubandhu: 「二種障者：一者煩惱障；二者三昧障。離彼二障，故言無所行」, of the two kinds of hindrance, one the defilement-hindrance, two the samādhi-hindrance; leaving those two hindrances, therefore it is said “nothing practiced”; Yijing renders it 「煩惱障·定障」, the defilement-hindrance and the concentration-hindrance, the names differing, the meaning one). Jizang and Kuiji read it the same: Jizang 「斷煩惱故得羅漢，斷三昧鄣得無諍定」 (cutting off the defilements one attains arhatship, cutting off the samādhi-hindrance one attains the non-contention concentration); Kuiji says Subhūti is called “foremost free of desire” because he has left both the 煩惱障 and the samādhi-hindrance, being “liberated-both-ways” (俱解脫), unlike the “wisdom-liberated” (慧解脫) who cuts only the 煩惱障 (Kuiji: 「能離煩惱障及定障故……以是俱解脫，故不同慧解脫但離煩惱障也」, able to leave the defilement-hindrance and the concentration-hindrance… being liberated-both-ways, hence unlike the wisdom-liberated who only leaves the defilement-hindrance).
So “in truth nothing practiced” is not doing nothing at all; it is that, the two hindrances left and the two graspings exhausted clean, the mind has not a single clingable “practicer, practiced” — and this is exactly what nothing-attained looks like in realization: the fruit-realization reached to the utmost, the thought of “I have attained” and the clinging of “I practice” are, on the contrary, ever the more wholly unattainable.
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 — Yogācāra’s teachings of the two emptinesses, the two hindrances, and nothing-attained have their own scriptural source (the Saṃdhinirmocana, the Yogācārabhūmi) and treatises (the Thirty Verses, the Twenty Verses, the Cheng weishi lun); prajñā is another lineage. Rather, it is that the same reality of “realizing yet nothing attained” the Diamond Sūtra states in the words of the sūtra (not making the thought of attainment · in truth nothing practiced), and Yogācāra states in the words of the treatise (the other-dependent provisional name · removing the wholly-imagined · cutting off the two hindrances · nothing attained); set side by side, the meaning shows the clearer. The Thirty Verses, by “nothing attained” (無所得), abide in the nature of consciousness-only, according with this division’s four fruits’ “in truth no dharma can be attained.” The Twenty Verses make clear consciousness-only and no object, and the four fruits’ “not entering form, sound, scent, taste, touch, dharma” is exactly the teaching that the six dusts are without reality, the realm empty. The Cheng weishi lun speaks of the separate cutting-off of the 煩惱障 and the 所知障 (Kuiji’s 「第四果煩惱定無、所知容起」, the fourth fruit certainly without defilement, the knowable may yet arise, is precisely the forerunner of this separate cutting of the two hindrances), sealing with the discriminated clinging-to-self of “I have attained the fruit” and the leaving of the two hindrances of non-contention. The Heart Sūtra of the prajñā lineage’s 「無智亦無得」 and 「以無所得故」 (no wisdom and no attainment · because of nothing attained) are, with this division’s “in truth nothing practiced,” one and the same gate of nothing attained. To close in one line: what the Diamond Sūtra says in the words of the sūtra — “the four fruits make no thought of attainment · in truth nothing practiced” — and what the Cheng weishi lun says in the technical terms of “the separate cutting of the two hindrances · clinging to self · nothing attained” 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 9 · One Mark, No Mark · exposition · Spring 2026
考據Apparatus
一、科判定位
| 科判系統 | 此分之位 |
|---|---|
| 昭明 32分 | 分九 一相無相分〔ZW 別本作「一切無相分」〕 |
| 釋慧鏡 §17 二分 | 前半（眾生空·破四相·煩惱障；四果無得·無「我得果」之我執） |
| 道安 三分 | 正宗分 · 格量段（舉小乘四果以成校量） |
| 無著十八住 T1510 | 第五住 於修道得勝中無慢（十八住「五、於修道得勝中無慢」[0757b07]；經文錨「為修道得勝中無慢故，經言『須嚧多阿般那頗作是念』」[0757c02–03]；離障礙住處十二障礙之初「離慢」[0761c15]） |
| 世親 二十七疑 T1511/T1513 | 「聖人取自果則法可取可說」之疑——T1511「若須陀洹等聖人取自果，云何言彼法不可取」[0785b20–21]，答以「自果不取」[0785b24]；T1513「諸預流等聖人並悉取其自果，如何此成非所取性」[0877b14–16]，答以「不取自果故，非可取可說」[0877b18] |
| 吉藏（三論）T1699 | 「『須陀洹能作是念』下，此第二、釋成格量之義」[0109b02–03]；舉小乘因果（四果）·大乘因果以成校量 |
| 智顗（天台）T1698 | 「『須陀洹』下，第三、舉菩薩遍行。初、舉四果，次、善吉自陳」[0078b25–26] |
| 窺基（唯識）T1700 | 「依世親說，此下有二校量，合二為一文」[0136c08]；依無著「上來四差別竟，此第五為修道勝得中無慢也……第四離障礙住處中有十二，此初離慢障也」[0137a02–05] |
格量·無慢義：此分承前分八（依法出生·一切諸佛及菩提法皆從此經出·佛法即非佛法）。古德三家同判：前分既言「一切賢聖皆以無為法而有差別」（分八末·一切聖人以無為得名），乃起疑——若諸法不可取不可說、無依無得，云何四果聖人取證自果、云何「我得果」（吉藏「釋成格量」[0109b07–15]、窺基「約二乘以生疑」[0136c10–12]、世親「若須陀洹等聖人取自果，云何言彼法不可取」[0785b20–21]）。本分以四果不作得念、無諍實無所行答此疑——果名但假立（依無為得名），證而無「我得」之分別。無著判此一段為十八住之第五「於修道得勝中無慢」（[0757c02–03]），離障礙住處十二障礙之初「離慢」（[0761c15]）——對治「我得果」之我得慢。本分無「即非」全式（見目三）。
二、異譯對勘（六漢譯 · 四果無得一段）
要句：須陀洹（入流·無所入）/ 斯陀含（一往來·實無往來）/ 阿那含（不來·實無來）/ 阿羅漢（實無有法名）/ 四相·我得 / 無諍三昧第一·離欲 / 實無所行·樂阿蘭那行
| 版本 | 四果無得一段（逐字節錄） | [出處] |
|---|---|---|
| 羅什 T235（原典） | 須陀洹名為入流，而無所入，不入色、聲、香、味、觸、法，是名須陀洹……斯陀含名一往來，而實無往來，是名斯陀含……阿那含名為不來，而實無來，是故名阿那含……實無有法名阿羅漢。世尊！若阿羅漢作是念『我得阿羅漢道』，即為著我、人、眾生、壽者……佛說我得無諍三昧人中最為第一，是第一離欲阿羅漢……以須菩提實無所行，而名須菩提是樂阿蘭那行。 | 0749b26–c15 |
| 菩提流支 T236 | 實無有法名須陀洹。不入色、聲、香、味、觸、法，是名須陀洹……實無有法名斯陀含，是名斯陀含……實無有法名阿那含，是名阿那含……實無有法名阿羅漢……佛說我得無諍三昧，最為第一……以須菩提實無所行，而名須菩提無諍、無諍行。 | 0753c06–c23 |
| 真諦 T237 | 實無所有能至於流，故說須陀洹。乃至色、聲、香、味、觸、法亦復如是，故名須陀洹……斯陀含名一往來，實無所有能至往來，是名斯陀含……阿那含名為不來，實無所有能至不來，是名阿那含……實無所有名阿羅漢。世尊！若阿羅漢作是念……此念即是我執、眾生執、壽者執、受者執……實無所住，住於無諍、住於無諍。 | 0763a05–a22 |
| 達摩笈多 T238 | 不彼，世尊！一人，彼故說名流入。不色入，不聲、不香、不味、不觸、不法入，彼故說名流入者……不彼有法若一來人，彼故說名一來者……不彼有法若不來入，彼故說名不來者……不彼有法若應名，彼故說名應者……如來、應、正遍知，無諍行最勝說……善家子無所行，彼故說名無諍行、無諍行者。 | 0767c24–0768a18 |
| 玄奘 T220⑨ | 諸預流者無少所預，故名預流；不預色、聲、香、味、觸、法，故名預流……以無少法證一來性，故名一來……以無少法證不還性，故名不還……以無少法名阿羅漢……即為執我、有情、命者、士夫、補特伽羅等……說我得無諍住最為第一……以都無所住，是故如來說名無諍住無諍住。 | 0981a25–b22 |
| 義淨 T239 | 諸預流者，無法可預，故名預流。不預色、聲、香、味、觸、法，故名預流……由彼無有少法證一來性，故名一來……無有少法證不還性，故名不還……無有少法名阿羅漢……則有我執，有情壽者更求趣執……如來說我得無諍住中最為第一……以都無所住，是故說我得無諍住、得無諍住。 | 0772c09–c28 |
異文所繫：
- 須陀洹之釋——「入流·無所入」對「實無有法名」二系：羅什作「名為入流，而無所入，不入色聲香味觸法」（就「流」之雙義立讀：入道流而逆生死流），真諦近之（「實無所有能至於流」），笈多直譯「流入·一人」；流支、玄奘、義淨「能斷」一系則作「實無有法名須陀洹／無少所預／無法可預」（逕標「無得」）。古德正釋此「流」之雙關（吉藏·智顗·窺基「逆生死流·入出世流」，見目四）——羅什之「入流而無所入」正是此雙義之文本所在。
- 四果名之異譯：羅什·流支·真諦用舊譯（須陀洹·斯陀含·阿那含·阿羅漢），玄奘·義淨「能斷」系作義譯（預流·一來·不還·阿羅漢），笈多梵序直譯作「流入·一來·不來·應」（阿羅漢 arhat 直譯「應〔供〕」）。
- 四相／四執之異：羅什·流支作我、人、眾生、壽者（四相）；真諦作我執·眾生執·壽者執·受者執（無「人」，有「受者」）；玄奘擴為我、有情、命者、士夫、補特伽羅等；義淨作我執·有情·壽者·更求趣執。與分三「四相／四想」之譯異同一指紋（見分三目二）。
- 「無諍」之重詞·勿縮：羅什作「無諍三昧」「樂阿蘭那行」（araṇā-vihārin，
[0749c14]）；流支「無諍、無諍行」、真諦「住於無諍、住於無諍」、玄奘「無諍住無諍住」、義淨「無諍住、得無諍住」——「能斷」系重詞並出（如來說X·X者），逐字錄，不縮。 - 阿那含「實無來」之底本：羅什
[0749c06]大正底本作「實無來」（〔明本作「不來」；CBETA 引智顗 T1698「略以無兼不，互文現耳」[0078c09–10]釋此〕）。今錄大正基字「實無來」。
三、即非・三性（本分無即非全式 · 無得唯識義）
本分無「X — 即非X — 是名X」之三段式，而作「名X — 而無Y — 是名X」之變式（須陀洹「名為入流，而無所入，是名須陀洹」[0749b28–29]；斯陀含「名一往來，而實無往來，是名斯陀含」[0749c02–03]；阿那含「名為不來，而實無來，是故名阿那含」[0749c05–06]）。此變式之唯識義在無得·假名：
- 果名（須陀洹·入流等）即依他起——隨世諦緣生而假立之名（無著「世諦故」之施設；窺基「但為其立名稱曰預流」
[0136c27–28]）。 - 而無所入·實無往來·實無有法名即遣遍計所執——無「實有一法可得·可至·可入」之分別（窺基「正證真理之時但冥契理，而不入色聲等法」
[0136c28–29]；「若在觀中之時，而無我得之慢」[0137a06–07]）。 - 是名（須陀洹等）即立圓成實——證無為真理而果名宛然（世親二譯「以聖人無為法得名」
T1511 [0785b26]／「由是無為所顯性故，彼於六境無有少法可得」T1513 [0877b19]）。
無「我得果」＝破我執·我得慢：「若阿羅漢作是念『我得阿羅漢道』，即為著我、人、眾生、壽者」[0749c09–10]——作「我得」之念即落四相我執（世親「若聖人起如是心『我能得果』，即為著我等」[0785c02]；窺基「我是預流等，故名之為慢」[0137a05–06]）。此即由我空（破四相）顯般若無得之證——果證而無能證所得之我，方契無分別。本分屬前半（眾生空·破四相）；其無得（實無所行）即後半「法空·無得」之先聲（後半法空之即非全式見分十七起，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》〔摘自 S5-P01〕；本分為其於四果無得位之一變式（無得·假名）。
四、諸家異釋（古德 · 二障 · 加重）
核心 加重 ——世親（二譯）「自果不取·離二障」二頌 ＋ 無著「離慢」 ＋ 古德三家「逆流·二障」： 古德於本分同依世親「無為得名故果不可取·無諍離二障」讀之，逐項錨於經文。
世親 T1511（菩提流支譯） 論曰 [0785b19–22]：「向說聖人無為法得名……若須陀洹等聖人取自果，云何言彼法不可取？……自下經文為斷此疑。」偈言 [0785b24–25]：
「不可取及說，自果不取故；依彼善吉者，說離二種障。」
逐項錨經：「以聖人無為法得名，是故不取一法……逆流者，如經『不入色聲香味觸法，是名須陀洹』故；乃至阿羅漢不取一法」[0785b26–c01]；「若聖人起如是心『我能得果』，即為著我等者……以有使煩惱、非行煩惱……彼於證時離取我等煩惱」[0785c02–04]。無諍離二障：「二種障者：一者煩惱障；二者三昧障。離彼二障，故言無所行」[0785c09–11]。
世親 T1513（義淨譯） 頌曰 [0877b18]：
「不取自果故，非可取可說。」
「由是無為所顯性故，彼於六境無有少法可得，既無可預名為預流。乃至阿羅漢亦無有法，理皆同此」[0877b19–21]；「若聖人作如是念『我得果』者，即是有其我等執者。意說有隨眠惑，非是現行」[0877b22–24]。無諍頌 [0877c01]：
「解脫二障故，說妙生無諍。」
「障有二種：一是煩惱障；二是定障。於斯脫故，不住二障，為此再言」[0877c02–03]。
〔二譯對位：「自果不取」（流支）／「不取自果」（義淨）同；無諍離二障——流支作「煩惱障·三昧障」、義淨作「煩惱障·定障」，名異義一，同一世親論之二漢譯。〕
無著 T1510（達摩笈多譯）：此分為十八住之第五「於修道得勝中無慢」[0757b07]，經文錨「須嚧多阿般那頗作是念」[0757c02–03]，於離障礙住處十二障礙判為初「離慢」[0761c15]。「為離慢故，經言『須陀洹頗作是念：我得須陀洹果』等，此為依義，顯示對治我得慢故」[0761c15–17]；「若須陀洹如是念：『我得須陀洹果。』即為有我想。若有我想，則為有慢應知，如是乃至阿羅漢亦爾」[0761c20–22]；「上座須菩提自顯無諍行第一……以無有法得阿羅漢及無所行故，說無諍行」[0761c22–24]。
吉藏（三論）T1699：「『須陀洹能作是念』下，此第二、釋成格量之義」[0109b02–03]。釋「流」：「須陀洹者，此言修習無漏，亦名逆生死流。流有二種：一、生死流，即是煩惱；二者、道流，名為正觀。今此中具明二流，名為入流，即是入於道流；不入色、聲、香、味觸法即是逆生死流」[0110b05–10]；「不見須陀洹故，即是人空入道流；無所入故，則涅槃不可得；逆生死流無所逆故、生死不可得故，不人、不法、不生死、不涅槃，乃名波若須陀洹也」[0110b19–23]。釋無諍：「凡有三種第一：一者、人第一。二者、離第一，謂離二種障：一、離煩惱障；二、離定障也。三者、德第一，即得無諍定及斷煩惱障智、斷定障智」[0110c28–0111a01]；「今依論釋。論云『依彼善吉者，遠離二種障，斷煩惱故得羅漢，斷三昧鄣得無諍定。』」[0111a20–21]。
智顗（天台）T1698：「『須陀洹』下，第三、舉菩薩遍行。初、舉四果，次、善吉自陳」[0078b25–26]。釋須陀洹：「此云修習無漏，亦逆生死流，亦入道流，不入色塵是逆流，至論在觀，無逆無入」[0078b26–28]；「違理故入六塵，背塵即會於理」[0078c04]。釋斯陀含：「而實無往來，已得生、法二空故」[0078c07–08]。釋阿那含：「亦云不來，欲界結盡，上界證無學，應云不來，略以無兼不，互文現耳」[0078c08–10]。釋阿羅漢：「此云無著，亦曰不生，三界生盡，所作已辦……得盡、無生二智，聲聞道極，故以道為名」[0078c10–13]。自陳：「以己所解驗理非虛，心空恒靜，諍從何起？蘭那者，寂靜行……蘭那，此云無事，若自謂是離欲，即是有事，何謂無事」[0078c13–17]。
窺基（唯識）T1700：「依世親說，此下有二校量，合二為一文……約二乘以生疑，謂前說一切聖人以無為法得名，無為法中無說無取者，何故預流等云我能取自果」[0136c08–13]；「流有二種，一者、生死流，二者、出世流類。若望生死即是逆流，若望出世便是預流也」[0136c20–22]；「若正在觀中證理之時，而無趣入，不作趣入之解，故但為其立名稱曰預流也」[0136c26–28]。依無著科：「上來四差別竟，此第五為修道勝得中無慢也。若八種住處之中第四離障礙住處中有十二，此初離慢障也」[0137a02–05]；四果之異：「然前三果出觀容起，第四果者，煩惱定無，所知容起也」[0137a07–08]。無諍·二障：「言『我是第一離欲』者，謂能離煩惱障及定障故也，以是俱解脫，故不同慧解脫但離煩惱障也」[0137a27–29]。
古德三家異流（三論·天台·唯識）於本分同歸世親二系：(一) 四果以無為法得名，故果不可取、不作「我得」念（無著「離我得慢」、世親「自果不取」、吉藏「人空法空」、智顗「在觀無逆無入·生法二空」、窺基「在觀冥契理·不作趣入解」）；(二) 無諍第一即離二障（流支「煩惱障·三昧障」／義淨「煩惱障·定障」／吉藏「離煩惱障·離定障」／窺基「離煩惱障及定障·俱解脫」）。窺基更以唯識細判：前三果出觀猶容起慢（隨眠未盡），第四果（阿羅漢）煩惱已定無，唯所知障容起——此即釋慧鏡 §17「後半破所知障」之古德伏線（聲聞斷煩惱障盡而所知障在）。
五、術語
須陀洹／預流 srota-āpanna（入流·逆流二義；吉藏「逆生死流·入道流」[0110b06–08]，玄奘作「預流」[0981a26]，笈多直譯「流入」[0767c27]）·
斯陀含／一來 sakṛd-āgāmin（一往來；智顗「欲界思惑九品已斷六品，餘三品在故言薄」[0078c05–06]）·
阿那含／不還 anāgāmin（不來·不還；智顗「略以無兼不，互文現耳」[0078c09–10]）·
阿羅漢 arhat（無著·不生·應供；智顗「此云無著，亦曰不生……得盡、無生二智」[0078c10–13]，笈多直譯「應」[0768a11]）·
無諍三昧／無諍住 araṇā-samādhi · araṇā-vihāra（離二障之定；世親「離煩惱障·三昧障〔定障〕」[0785c09–10]／[0877c02]）·
樂阿蘭那行 araṇā-vihārin（寂靜·無事行；T0235 [0749c14] Araṇāvihārin；智顗「蘭那，此云無事」[0078c16]）·
二障 dvividha-āvaraṇa（煩惱障 kleśāvaraṇa ＋定障／三昧障 samādhi-āvaraṇa；窺基「俱解脫·不同慧解脫但離煩惱障」[0137a28–29]）。〔梵文發音輔助；四果新舊譯異見目二。〕
六、譬喻・修辭（四果無得無譬喻 · 修辭即四疊與翻轉）
本分無譬喻（虛空喻在分四·須彌山喻在分十一）。修辭之要在四疊與翻轉：四果（須陀洹·斯陀含·阿那含·阿羅漢）以同式四疊問答（「能作是念『我得X果』不？」—「不也」—「何以故」），由低果累進至高果（阿羅漢），步步遞升而句句翻轉為「無得·無所有·實無有法」；至阿羅漢更由須菩提自陳引證（我得無諍第一·而我不作是念），以己所證為信。其修辭骨幹：正極處（果之證得·無諍第一）陡然翻轉為「實無所行」——果愈高而「無得」愈顯。此「累進而即空」之筆，與分三「全度而即空」、分四「無住而福如虛空」同一翻轉之式。此目於本分輕，於譬喻分（分四·分十四·分二十六·分三十二）加重。
七、互讀
- 三十頌（T1586）：二空·我執（v.1「由假說我法」破實我；本分「我得果」之我執＝破實我之果位施）；無得（v.28「無所得」住唯識性）為四果無得之論本對應。
- 二十論（T1590）：唯識無境（四果「不入色聲香味觸法」＝六塵無實·境空）之論本。
- 成唯識論（T1585）：二障（煩惱障·所知障；窺基「第四果煩惱定無，所知容起」
〔見目四〕即二障別斷之論本技術語）·我執（「我得果」之分別我執）。 - 心經（T251）：「無智亦無得」「以無所得故」——果證而無能得所得，與本分「實無所行·無諍」同一無得之門。
本分「四果不作得念·實無所行」，即三十頌「無得」、成唯識論「二障·我執」之經語對應；「不入色聲香味觸法」即二十論「唯識無境」之果位施；無諍「離二障」即成唯識論二障別斷之先聲（古德二障說見〔目四〕）。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·攝大乘論於本分無正面對位，從闕。成唯識論二障義穩定名引，俟成增鏈。〕
八、東西對觀（西方視角 · 對觀，非裁奪）
- 「四果聖人不作『我得果』之念」 ↔ 西方知識論之「無設定之自證」（無反身之主體執取；如沙特前反思意識 le préréflexif）：西方亦思「證而不執證」之意識結構；唯識／古德讀「無我得」非僅意識之非反身性，乃斷我執·離我得慢之修證（窺基「在觀冥契理·無我得慢」
[0137a06–07]）——是隨眠之斷（世親「有隨眠惑·非是現行」[0877b23–24]），非僅描述之意識相。 - 「果名假立·實無有法名」 ↔ 西方唯名論（普遍名相無實體；果名但約定俗成之施設）：可對觀；然古德之「假名」非純約定——果名依無為真理所顯而立（世親「無為所顯性故」
[0877b19]），名假而所證之圓成不虛，非唯名論之「名外無實」之全否定。 - 「無諍離二障」 ↔ 西方哲學之「無諍／反獨斷」（如皮浪主義懸擱、維根斯坦「不起爭論」之治療哲學）：西方多讀「無諍」為論辯態度之止息；古德讀為離煩惱障·定障之證境（吉藏「斷煩惱故得羅漢，斷三昧鄣得無諍定」
[0111a21]）——是定慧所證之寂，非論證策略之中止。 - 「四果累進·阿羅漢所知容起」 ↔ 西方階位實在論之解構（果位非實有自性之等級）：然窺基以唯識細判二障別斷（聲聞斷煩惱障盡·所知障在）——階位之「無實」不礙修證次第之宛然，是依他幻有之位次，非等級之純消解。
- 對觀之要：西方傾向以「證而不執」「果名無實」為意識結構或語言約定之分析；古德以「無得·無諍」為斷障之修證階位（離慢·離二障·俱解脫）。分析與修證之別，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 [0749b26–c15]（原典 · 一相無相分）。六譯本四果無得一段 [出處] 見目二：流支 T0236a [0753c06–c23] · 真諦 T0237 [0763a05–a22] · 笈多 T0238 [0767c24–0768a18] · 玄奘 T220⑨ [0981a25–b22] · 義淨 T0239 [0772c09–c28]。 科判／論本：無著 T1510 [0757b07·0757c02–03·0761c15–c25] · 世親 T1511 [0785b19–c12] · 世親 T1513 [0877b13–c03]。 古德：吉藏 T1699 [0109b02·0110b05–b23·0110c28–0111a21] · 智顗 T1698 [0078b25–c17] · 窺基 T1700 [0136c07–0137b04]。
1 · Placement in the Sectioning Schemes
| Sectioning scheme | Placement of this division |
|---|---|
| Zhaoming 32 divisions | Division 9, One Mark, No Mark 〔a variant ZW edition has 「一切無相分」〕 |
| Shi Huijing §17 two-part | First half (emptiness of beings · breaking the four marks · the affliction-hindrance; the four fruits without attainment · without the self-clinging "I have attained the fruit") |
| Dao'an's three-part schema | Main-teaching division · the weighing passage (raising the Hīnayāna four fruits to complete the weighing) |
| Asaṅga's eighteen abodes, T1510 | Fifth abode, without pride amid the gains of the path of cultivation (eighteen abodes, "fifth, without pride amid the gains of the path of cultivation" [0757b07]; the sūtra-text anchor 「為修道得勝中無慢故，經言『須嚧多阿般那頗作是念』」 [0757c02–03]; among the twelve hindrances of the abode of parting-from-hindrance, the first, "parting from pride" [0761c15]) |
| Vasubandhu's twenty-seven doubts, T1511/T1513 | The doubt "if the holy ones grasp their own fruit, then the dharma may be grasped and spoken" — T1511 「若須陀洹等聖人取自果，云何言彼法不可取」 [0785b20–21], answered with 「自果不取」 [0785b24]; T1513 「諸預流等聖人並悉取其自果，如何此成非所取性」 [0877b14–16], answered with 「不取自果故，非可取可說」 [0877b18] |
| Jizang (Three-Treatise), T1699 | 「『須陀洹能作是念』下，此第二、釋成格量之義」 [0109b02–03]; raising the Hīnayāna cause-and-fruit (the four fruits) and the Mahāyāna cause-and-fruit to complete the weighing |
| Zhiyi (Tiantai), T1698 | 「『須陀洹』下，第三、舉菩薩遍行。初、舉四果，次、善吉自陳」 [0078b25–26] |
| Kuiji (Yogācāra), T1700 | 「依世親說，此下有二校量，合二為一文」 [0136c08]; following Asaṅga, 「上來四差別竟，此第五為修道勝得中無慢也……第四離障礙住處中有十二，此初離慢障也」 [0137a02–05] |
The sense of the weighing · without pride: this division follows division 8 (born of the dharma · all the buddhas and the bodhi-dharma issue from this sūtra · Buddha-dharma is is-not Buddha-dharma). The three ancient-master houses all judge the same: since the previous division said 「一切賢聖皆以無為法而有差別」 (the end of division 8 · all the holy ones are named by the unconditioned), a doubt arises — if dharmas cannot be grasped or spoken, are without reliance and without attainment, how do the holy ones of the four fruits grasp-and-realize their own fruit, how is there "I have attained the fruit" (Jizang 「釋成格量」 [0109b07–15], Kuiji 「約二乘以生疑」 [0136c10–12], Vasubandhu 「若須陀洹等聖人取自果，云何言彼法不可取」 [0785b20–21]). This division answers the doubt with the four fruits not entertaining the thought of attainment, and non-contention's having in reality nothing practiced — the fruit-name is only provisionally established (named by the unconditioned), realized without the discrimination of "I have attained." Asaṅga judges this passage as the fifth of the eighteen abodes, "without pride amid the gains of the path of cultivation" ([0757c02–03]), the first, "parting from pride," of the twelve hindrances of the abode of parting-from-hindrance ([0761c15]) — counteracting the pride-of-attainment "I have attained the fruit." This division has no full "is-not" formula (see register 3).
2 · Collation of the Variant Translations (six Chinese versions · the four-fruits-without-attainment passage)
Key passage: stream-enterer (entering the stream · nothing entered) / once-returner (one coming-and-going · in reality no coming-and-going) / non-returner (not coming · in reality no coming) / arhat (in reality no dharma named) / four marks · I have attained / samādhi of non-contention, foremost · free of desire / in reality nothing practiced · delighting in the practice of araṇā
| Version | The four-fruits-without-attainment passage (verbatim excerpt) | [loc] |
|---|---|---|
| Kumārajīva T235 (root) | 須陀洹名為入流，而無所入，不入色、聲、香、味、觸、法，是名須陀洹……斯陀含名一往來，而實無往來，是名斯陀含……阿那含名為不來，而實無來，是故名阿那含……實無有法名阿羅漢。世尊！若阿羅漢作是念『我得阿羅漢道』，即為著我、人、眾生、壽者……佛說我得無諍三昧人中最為第一，是第一離欲阿羅漢……以須菩提實無所行，而名須菩提是樂阿蘭那行。 | 0749b26–c15 |
| Bodhiruci T236 | 實無有法名須陀洹。不入色、聲、香、味、觸、法，是名須陀洹……實無有法名斯陀含，是名斯陀含……實無有法名阿那含，是名阿那含……實無有法名阿羅漢……佛說我得無諍三昧，最為第一……以須菩提實無所行，而名須菩提無諍、無諍行。 | 0753c06–c23 |
| Paramārtha T237 | 實無所有能至於流，故說須陀洹。乃至色、聲、香、味、觸、法亦復如是，故名須陀洹……斯陀含名一往來，實無所有能至往來，是名斯陀含……阿那含名為不來，實無所有能至不來，是名阿那含……實無所有名阿羅漢。世尊！若阿羅漢作是念……此念即是我執、眾生執、壽者執、受者執……實無所住，住於無諍、住於無諍。 | 0763a05–a22 |
| Dharmagupta T238 | 不彼，世尊！一人，彼故說名流入。不色入，不聲、不香、不味、不觸、不法入，彼故說名流入者……不彼有法若一來人，彼故說名一來者……不彼有法若不來入，彼故說名不來者……不彼有法若應名，彼故說名應者……如來、應、正遍知，無諍行最勝說……善家子無所行，彼故說名無諍行、無諍行者。 | 0767c24–0768a18 |
| Xuanzang T220⑨ | 諸預流者無少所預，故名預流；不預色、聲、香、味、觸、法，故名預流……以無少法證一來性，故名一來……以無少法證不還性，故名不還……以無少法名阿羅漢……即為執我、有情、命者、士夫、補特伽羅等……說我得無諍住最為第一……以都無所住，是故如來說名無諍住無諍住。 | 0981a25–b22 |
| Yijing T239 | 諸預流者，無法可預，故名預流。不預色、聲、香、味、觸、法，故名預流……由彼無有少法證一來性，故名一來……無有少法證不還性，故名不還……無有少法名阿羅漢……則有我執，有情壽者更求趣執……如來說我得無諍住中最為第一……以都無所住，是故說我得無諍住、得無諍住。 | 0772c09–c28 |
What the variants turn on:
- The gloss of stream-enterer — the two lines "entering the stream · nothing entered" versus "in reality no dharma named": Kumārajīva has 「名為入流，而無所入，不入色聲香味觸法」 (the reading set up on the double sense of "stream": entering the stream of the path and going against the stream of birth-and-death), Paramārtha is near it (「實無所有能至於流」), Dharmagupta renders it directly 「流入·一人」; the "Able-to-Cut" line of Bodhiruci, Xuanzang, and Yijing has 「實無有法名須陀洹／無少所預／無法可預」 (directly marking "no-attainment"). The ancient masters precisely gloss this double sense of "stream" (Jizang · Zhiyi · Kuiji "going against the stream of birth-and-death · entering the transmundane stream," see register 4) — Kumārajīva's "entering the stream yet nothing entered" is exactly where this double sense lies in the text.
- The variant renderings of the four fruit-names: Kumārajīva, Bodhiruci, and Paramārtha use the old transliterations (須陀洹·斯陀含·阿那含·阿羅漢), Xuanzang and Yijing's "Able-to-Cut" line uses the sense-rendering (預流·一來·不還·阿羅漢), Dharmagupta directly translates the Sanskrit word-order as 「流入·一來·不來·應」 (arhat arhat directly rendered 「應〔供〕」).
- The variance of the four marks / four clingings: Kumārajīva and Bodhiruci have 我、人、眾生、壽者 (the four marks); Paramārtha has 我執·眾生執·壽者執·受者執 (no 「人」, with 「受者」); Xuanzang expands it to 我、有情、命者、士夫、補特伽羅等; Yijing has 我執·有情·壽者·更求趣執. The same fingerprint as the rendering-variance of "four marks / four conceptions" in division 3 (see division 3, register 2).
- The repeated phrase of "non-contention" · not to be compressed: Kumārajīva has 「無諍三昧」「樂阿蘭那行」 (araṇā-vihārin,
[0749c14]); Bodhiruci 「無諍、無諍行」, Paramārtha 「住於無諍、住於無諍」, Xuanzang 「無諍住無諍住」, Yijing 「無諍住、得無諍住」 — the "Able-to-Cut" line has the repeated phrase out twice (the Tathāgata says X · X), recorded verbatim, not compressed. - The base text of non-returner's 「實無來」: Kumārajīva
[0749c06]in the Taishō base text reads 「實無來」 (〔the Ming edition has 「不來」; CBETA cites Zhiyi T1698 「略以無兼不，互文現耳」[0078c09–10]to gloss this〕). Here the Taishō base graph 「實無來」 is recorded.
3 · “Is-Not” and the Three Natures (this division has no full "is-not" formula · the Yogācāra sense of no-attainment)
This division has no three-part "X — is-not X — is called X" formula, but takes the variant form "named X — yet without Y — is called X" (stream-enterer 「名為入流，而無所入，是名須陀洹」 [0749b28–29]; once-returner 「名一往來，而實無往來，是名斯陀含」 [0749c02–03]; non-returner 「名為不來，而實無來，是故名阿那含」 [0749c05–06]). The Yogācāra sense of this variant form lies in no-attainment · provisional naming:
- The fruit-name (stream-enterer · entering the stream, etc.) is the dependent-arisen — a name provisionally established following worldly-truth conditioned arising (Asaṅga's establishing 「世諦故」; Kuiji 「但為其立名稱曰預流」
[0136c27–28]). - 而無所入·實無往來·實無有法名 is the removal of the wholly-imagined — without the discrimination of "really there is a dharma to be attained · arrived at · entered" (Kuiji 「正證真理之時但冥契理，而不入色聲等法」
[0136c28–29]; 「若在觀中之時，而無我得之慢」[0137a06–07]). - 是名 (stream-enterer, etc.) is the establishing of the perfectly-accomplished — realizing the unconditioned principle while the fruit-name remains vivid (Vasubandhu in both translations 「以聖人無為法得名」
T1511 [0785b26]/ 「由是無為所顯性故，彼於六境無有少法可得」T1513 [0877b19]).
Without "I have attained the fruit" = breaking the self-clinging · the pride-of-attainment: 「若阿羅漢作是念『我得阿羅漢道』，即為著我、人、眾生、壽者」 [0749c09–10] — to entertain the thought "I have attained" is to fall into the self-clinging of the four marks (Vasubandhu 「若聖人起如是心『我能得果』，即為著我等」 [0785c02]; Kuiji 「我是預流等，故名之為慢」 [0137a05–06]). This is the realization revealing prajñā's no-attainment through emptiness of self (breaking the four marks) — the fruit is realized without the self of an attainer or anything attained, and so accords with non-discrimination. This division belongs to the first half (emptiness of beings · breaking the four marks); its no-attainment (in reality nothing practiced) is the prelude to the second half's "emptiness of dharmas · no-attainment" (the second half's full "is-not" formula begins at division 17, see division 17, register 3).
For the reading that maps "is-not" onto the three natures, see Shi Huijing, The Mapping of the Three-Part “Is-Not” Formula onto the Yogācāra Three Natures 〔drawn from S5-P01〕; this division is its one variant form (no-attainment · provisional naming) at the position of the four fruits without attainment.
4 · Variant Readings of the Ancient Masters (the two hindrances · weighted)
Core, weighted — Vasubandhu (two translations) "the own fruit is not grasped · parting from the two hindrances" in two stanzas + Asaṅga "parting from pride" + the three ancient-master houses "going against the stream · the two hindrances": the ancient masters all, in this division, read it following Vasubandhu's "named by the unconditioned, hence the fruit cannot be grasped · non-contention parting from the two hindrances," anchoring each to the sūtra-text.
Vasubandhu T1511 (Bodhiruci's translation) the treatise says [0785b19–22]: 「向說聖人無為法得名……若須陀洹等聖人取自果，云何言彼法不可取？……自下經文為斷此疑。」 The verse [0785b24–25]:
「不可取及說，自果不取故；依彼善吉者，說離二種障。」
Anchoring each to the sūtra: 「以聖人無為法得名，是故不取一法……逆流者，如經『不入色聲香味觸法，是名須陀洹』故；乃至阿羅漢不取一法」 [0785b26–c01]; 「若聖人起如是心『我能得果』，即為著我等者……以有使煩惱、非行煩惱……彼於證時離取我等煩惱」 [0785c02–04]. Non-contention parting from the two hindrances: 「二種障者：一者煩惱障；二者三昧障。離彼二障，故言無所行」 [0785c09–11].
Vasubandhu T1513 (Yijing's translation) the stanza says [0877b18]:
「不取自果故，非可取可說。」
「由是無為所顯性故，彼於六境無有少法可得，既無可預名為預流。乃至阿羅漢亦無有法，理皆同此」 [0877b19–21]; 「若聖人作如是念『我得果』者，即是有其我等執者。意說有隨眠惑，非是現行」 [0877b22–24]. The non-contention stanza [0877c01]:
「解脫二障故，說妙生無諍。」
「障有二種：一是煩惱障；二是定障。於斯脫故，不住二障，為此再言」 [0877c02–03].
〔The two translations matched: 「自果不取」 (Bodhiruci) / 「不取自果」 (Yijing) are the same; non-contention parting from the two hindrances — Bodhiruci has 「煩惱障·三昧障」, Yijing 「煩惱障·定障」, differing in name, one in meaning, the same Vasubandhu treatise in two Chinese translations.〕
Asaṅga T1510 (Dharmagupta's translation): this division is the fifth of the eighteen abodes, "without pride amid the gains of the path of cultivation" [0757b07], the sūtra-text anchor 「須嚧多阿般那頗作是念」 [0757c02–03], judged among the twelve hindrances of the abode of parting-from-hindrance as the first, "parting from pride" [0761c15]. 「為離慢故，經言『須陀洹頗作是念：我得須陀洹果』等，此為依義，顯示對治我得慢故」 [0761c15–17]; 「若須陀洹如是念：『我得須陀洹果。』即為有我想。若有我想，則為有慢應知，如是乃至阿羅漢亦爾」 [0761c20–22]; 「上座須菩提自顯無諍行第一……以無有法得阿羅漢及無所行故，說無諍行」 [0761c22–24].
Jizang (Three-Treatise) T1699: 「『須陀洹能作是念』下，此第二、釋成格量之義」 [0109b02–03]. On "stream": 「須陀洹者，此言修習無漏，亦名逆生死流。流有二種：一、生死流，即是煩惱；二者、道流，名為正觀。今此中具明二流，名為入流，即是入於道流；不入色、聲、香、味觸法即是逆生死流」 [0110b05–10]; 「不見須陀洹故，即是人空入道流；無所入故，則涅槃不可得；逆生死流無所逆故、生死不可得故，不人、不法、不生死、不涅槃，乃名波若須陀洹也」 [0110b19–23]. On non-contention: 「凡有三種第一：一者、人第一。二者、離第一，謂離二種障：一、離煩惱障；二、離定障也。三者、德第一，即得無諍定及斷煩惱障智、斷定障智」 [0110c28–0111a01]; 「今依論釋。論云『依彼善吉者，遠離二種障，斷煩惱故得羅漢，斷三昧鄣得無諍定。』」 [0111a20–21].
Zhiyi (Tiantai) T1698: 「『須陀洹』下，第三、舉菩薩遍行。初、舉四果，次、善吉自陳」 [0078b25–26]. On stream-enterer: 「此云修習無漏，亦逆生死流，亦入道流，不入色塵是逆流，至論在觀，無逆無入」 [0078b26–28]; 「違理故入六塵，背塵即會於理」 [0078c04]. On once-returner: 「而實無往來，已得生、法二空故」 [0078c07–08]. On non-returner: 「亦云不來，欲界結盡，上界證無學，應云不來，略以無兼不，互文現耳」 [0078c08–10]. On arhat: 「此云無著，亦曰不生，三界生盡，所作已辦……得盡、無生二智，聲聞道極，故以道為名」 [0078c10–13]. The self-profession: 「以己所解驗理非虛，心空恒靜，諍從何起？蘭那者，寂靜行……蘭那，此云無事，若自謂是離欲，即是有事，何謂無事」 [0078c13–17].
Kuiji (Yogācāra) T1700: 「依世親說，此下有二校量，合二為一文……約二乘以生疑，謂前說一切聖人以無為法得名，無為法中無說無取者，何故預流等云我能取自果」 [0136c08–13]; 「流有二種，一者、生死流，二者、出世流類。若望生死即是逆流，若望出世便是預流也」 [0136c20–22]; 「若正在觀中證理之時，而無趣入，不作趣入之解，故但為其立名稱曰預流也」 [0136c26–28]. Following Asaṅga's sectioning: 「上來四差別竟，此第五為修道勝得中無慢也。若八種住處之中第四離障礙住處中有十二，此初離慢障也」 [0137a02–05]; on the difference of the four fruits: 「然前三果出觀容起，第四果者，煩惱定無，所知容起也」 [0137a07–08]. On non-contention · the two hindrances: 「言『我是第一離欲』者，謂能離煩惱障及定障故也，以是俱解脫，故不同慧解脫但離煩惱障也」 [0137a27–29].
The three ancient-master streams (Three-Treatise · Tiantai · Yogācāra) in this division all return to Vasubandhu's two lines: (i) the four fruits are named by the unconditioned, hence the fruit cannot be grasped, and the thought "I have attained" is not entertained (Asaṅga "parting from the pride-of-attainment," Vasubandhu "the own fruit is not grasped," Jizang "emptiness of self, emptiness of dharma," Zhiyi "in contemplation no going-against and no entering · the two emptinesses of self and dharma," Kuiji "in contemplation tacitly according with the principle · not making the understanding of going-and-entering"); (ii) foremost in non-contention is precisely parting from the two hindrances (Bodhiruci "the affliction-hindrance · the samādhi-hindrance" / Yijing "the affliction-hindrance · the concentration-hindrance" / Jizang "parting from the affliction-hindrance · parting from the concentration-hindrance" / Kuiji "parting from the affliction-hindrance and the concentration-hindrance · both-released"). Kuiji judges further in Yogācāra terms: the first three fruits may still give rise to pride when out of contemplation (the latencies not yet exhausted), while the fourth fruit (arhat) has affliction definitively absent, and only the cognitive-hindrance may arise — this is the ancient masters' buried thread for Shi Huijing's §17 "the second half breaks the cognitive-hindrance" (the śrāvaka cuts off the affliction-hindrance fully while the cognitive-hindrance remains).
5 · Terminology
須陀洹／預流 srota-āpanna (the two senses of entering-the-stream · going-against-the-stream; Jizang 「逆生死流·入道流」 [0110b06–08], Xuanzang has 「預流」 [0981a26], Dharmagupta directly renders 「流入」 [0767c27]) ·
斯陀含／一來 sakṛd-āgāmin (one coming-and-going; Zhiyi 「欲界思惑九品已斷六品，餘三品在故言薄」 [0078c05–06]) ·
阿那含／不還 anāgāmin (not coming · not returning; Zhiyi 「略以無兼不，互文現耳」 [0078c09–10]) ·
阿羅漢 arhat (worthy · not-born · worthy-of-offerings; Zhiyi 「此云無著，亦曰不生……得盡、無生二智」 [0078c10–13], Dharmagupta directly renders 「應」 [0768a11]) ·
無諍三昧／無諍住 araṇā-samādhi · araṇā-vihāra (the concentration of parting from the two hindrances; Vasubandhu 「離煩惱障·三昧障〔定障〕」 [0785c09–10] / [0877c02]) ·
樂阿蘭那行 araṇā-vihārin (the practice of quiescence · no-affairs; T0235 [0749c14] Araṇāvihārin; Zhiyi 「蘭那，此云無事」 [0078c16]) ·
二障 dvividha-āvaraṇa (the affliction-hindrance kleśāvaraṇa ＋ the concentration-hindrance / samādhi-hindrance samādhi-āvaraṇa; Kuiji 「俱解脫·不同慧解脫但離煩惱障」 [0137a28–29]). 〔Sanskrit as a pronunciation aid; for the old / new rendering-variance of the four fruits, see register 2.〕
6 · Simile and Rhetoric (the four fruits without attainment have no simile · the rhetoric is the fourfold layering and overturning)
This division has no simile (the empty-space simile is in division 4, the Sumeru simile in division 11). The point of the rhetoric lies in the fourfold layering and overturning: the four fruits (stream-enterer · once-returner · non-returner · arhat) in question-and-answer of the same fourfold-layered form (「能作是念『我得X果』不？」—「不也」—「何以故」), ascending step by step from the lower fruit to the higher (arhat), advancing step by step yet overturning clause by clause into "no-attainment · nothing existent · in reality no dharma." At the arhat it is further by Subhūti's self-profession in witness (I have attained foremost non-contention · yet I do not entertain this thought), taking what he himself realizes as testimony. The rhetorical skeleton: just at the positive extreme (the attaining of the fruit · foremost non-contention) it abruptly overturns into "in reality nothing practiced" — the higher the fruit, the more "no-attainment" is manifested. This brushstroke of "ascending yet at once empty" is one and the same overturning form as division 3's "wholly delivering yet at once empty" and division 4's "without abiding yet merit like empty space." This register is light in this division, and heavy in the simile divisions (4 · 14 · 26 · 32).
7 · Cross-Reading
- Thirty Verses (T1586): the two emptinesses · self-clinging (v. 1 「由假說我法」 breaks real self; this division's "I have attained the fruit" self-clinging = the fruit-position expression of breaking real self); no-attainment (v. 28 「無所得」 abiding in the nature of consciousness-only) is the treatise-text counterpart of the four fruits without attainment.
- Twenty Verses (T1590): consciousness-only with no object (the four fruits 「不入色聲香味觸法」 = the six dusts without reality · emptiness of object) is the treatise-text.
- Cheng weishi lun (T1585): the two hindrances (the affliction-hindrance · the cognitive-hindrance; Kuiji 「第四果煩惱定無，所知容起」
〔see register 4〕is the treatise-text technical vocabulary of the separate cutting of the two hindrances) · self-clinging (the discriminative self-clinging of "I have attained the fruit"). - Heart Sūtra (T251): 「無智亦無得」「以無所得故」 — the fruit realized without an attainer and anything attained, one and the same gate of no-attainment as this division's "in reality nothing practiced · non-contention."
This division's "the four fruits not entertaining the thought of attainment · in reality nothing practiced" is the scriptural counterpart of the Thirty Verses' "no-attainment" and the Cheng weishi lun's "the two hindrances · self-clinging"; "not entering form, sound, scent, taste, touch, dharma" is the fruit-position expression of the Twenty Verses' "consciousness-only with no object"; non-contention's "parting from the two hindrances" is the prelude to the Cheng weishi lun's separate cutting of the two hindrances (the ancient masters' two-hindrances doctrine, see register 4). 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〕. 〔Convention: list only what is genuinely pertinent; no forced pegging — linkage, not padding. The Madhyānta-vibhāga and the Mahāyāna-saṃgraha have no frontal counterpart in this division; omitted. The Cheng weishi lun's two-hindrances sense is cited by stable name, to be added as a link when it is sealed.〕
8 · East–West Observation (Western perspective · observation, not adjudication)
- "The holy ones of the four fruits do not entertain the thought 'I have attained the fruit'" ↔ Western epistemology's "self-awareness without positing" (a grasping subject without reflexivity; as in Sartre's pre-reflective consciousness, le préréflexif): the West too thinks of "realizing-while-not-clinging-to-the-realization" as a structure of consciousness; the Yogācāra / ancient-master reading of "no I-have-attained" is not merely the non-reflexivity of consciousness but the cutting of self-clinging · parting from the pride-of-attainment through realization (Kuiji 「在觀冥契理·無我得慢」
[0137a06–07]) — the cutting of latencies (Vasubandhu 「有隨眠惑·非是現行」[0877b23–24]), not merely a described mark of consciousness. - "The fruit-name provisionally established · in reality no dharma named" ↔ Western nominalism (universals and names have no substance; the fruit-name is but a conventionally-agreed establishing): one may set them beside; yet the ancient masters' "provisional name" is not purely conventional — the fruit-name is established as manifested by the unconditioned principle (Vasubandhu 「無為所顯性故」
[0877b19]), the name provisional but the perfectly-accomplished it realizes not unreal, not nominalism's total negation of "no reality apart from the name." - "Non-contention parting from the two hindrances" ↔ Western philosophy's "non-contention / anti-dogmatism" (as in Pyrrhonist suspension, Wittgenstein's "raise no disputes" therapeutic philosophy): the West largely reads "non-contention" as the cessation of a disputational attitude; the ancient masters read it as the realized state of parting from the affliction-hindrance · the concentration-hindrance (Jizang 「斷煩惱故得羅漢，斷三昧鄣得無諍定」
[0111a21]) — the stillness realized by concentration and wisdom, not the suspension of an argumentative strategy. - "The four fruits ascending · the arhat's cognitive-hindrance may arise" ↔ the deconstruction of Western hierarchical realism (the fruit-positions are not a self-natured grade really existent): yet Kuiji judges in Yogācāra terms the separate cutting of the two hindrances (the śrāvaka cuts off the affliction-hindrance fully · the cognitive-hindrance remains) — the "unreality" of the fruit-positions does not bar the vividness of the sequence of realization, a dependently-illusory order of positions, not the pure dissolution of a grade.
- The point of the observation: the West tends to analyze "realizing-while-not-clinging" and "the fruit-name unreal" as a structure of consciousness or a linguistic convention; the ancient masters take "no-attainment · non-contention" as the realized positions of the cutting of hindrances (parting from pride · parting from the two hindrances · both-released). The difference of analysis and realization 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 [0749b26–c15] (root · One Mark, No Mark). The six versions' four-fruits-without-attainment passage [loc] is in register 2: Bodhiruci T0236a [0753c06–c23] · Paramārtha T0237 [0763a05–a22] · Dharmagupta T0238 [0767c24–0768a18] · Xuanzang T220⑨ [0981a25–b22] · Yijing T0239 [0772c09–c28]. Sectioning / treatise texts: Asaṅga T1510 [0757b07·0757c02–03·0761c15–c25] · Vasubandhu T1511 [0785b19–c12] · Vasubandhu T1513 [0877b13–c03]. Ancient masters: Jizang T1699 [0109b02·0110b05–b23·0110c28–0111a21] · Zhiyi T1698 [0078b25–c17] · Kuiji T1700 [0136c07–0137b04].
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 9 · One Mark, No Mark · apparatus · Spring 2026