金剛般若波羅蜜經 分二十二 無法可得分
整部經一路破到這裡，須菩提問了一句最直的話：佛成就的無上正覺，是不是其實無所得？佛印得也決絕——「如是，如是！我於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提乃至無有少法可得，是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」連一丁點兒可拿到手的法都沒有，這才叫菩提。前面破的是把外境、把眾生當實有的執，這一句把刀回過頭來，落在「菩提」自身：原來連最尊貴的那個正覺，也不是一件可證、可得的東西。要緊的是，這「無得」並非落空——所遣的，只是「有一個實法可得」的妄計；遣盡了它，無實法可得的真如菩提反而宛然現前。無一物可得之處，正是真如顯露之時；所謂「得」，從來不是抓到了什麼，而是放下了那「以為有所得」的最後一念。
Having broken its way through the whole sūtra to this point, Subhūti asks the most direct question of all: is it that the unsurpassed awakening the Buddha accomplished is in fact nothing attained? And the Buddha confirms it without reservation — 「如是，如是！我於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提乃至無有少法可得，是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」(So it is, so it is! In anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi there is not even the slightest dharma that can be attained — this is named anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi). There is not so much as a sliver of a dharma to be taken in hand, and only this is called bodhi. What was broken earlier was the clinging that takes outer objects and beings as real; this line turns the blade back and lets it fall upon "bodhi" itself: it turns out that even the most venerable of all, that right awakening, is not a thing that can be realized or attained. What matters is that this "no-attainment" does not collapse into emptiness — what is cleared away is only the false reckoning that "there is a real dharma to be attained"; clear that away entirely, and the suchness-bodhi in which no real dharma can be attained stands, on the contrary, vividly present. The very place where not one thing can be attained is the very moment when suchness is laid bare; what is called "attaining" was never the seizing of anything, but the laying down of that last thought which "supposes there is something attained."
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 22 · No Dharma Can Be Attained · essence · Spring 2026
〔一〕須菩提問：佛得菩提，是無所得嗎
經曰：
須菩提白佛言：「世尊！佛得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，為無所得耶？」
須菩提對佛說：「世尊！佛所成就的無上正等正覺，是不是其實並沒有得到什麼呢？」
〔二〕佛印可：無有少法可得，才叫菩提
經曰：
「如是，如是！須菩提！我於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提乃至無有少法可得，是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。
「正是這樣，正是這樣！須菩提，我在這無上正等正覺當中，連一丁點兒法都沒有可得，正因為這樣，才稱它作無上正等正覺。」
[1] Subhūti Asks: In the Buddha's Awakening, Is There Nothing Attained?
The sūtra says:
須菩提白佛言：「世尊！佛得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，為無所得耶？」
Subhūti said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, the supreme, perfect awakening that the Buddha has reached — is it that, in truth, nothing at all was attained?"
[2] The Buddha Confirms: It Is Because Not the Least Dharma Can Be Attained That It Is Called Awakening
The sūtra says:
「如是，如是！須菩提！我於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提乃至無有少法可得，是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。
"Just so, just so! Subhūti, in this supreme, perfect awakening, there is not even the least Dharma that can be attained — and it is precisely for this reason that it is called supreme, perfect awakening."
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 22 · No Dharma Can Be Attained · vernacular · Spring 2026
拿三性（遍計所執·依他起·圓成實）、三無性、二障二取、轉依，來照金剛經這一問一印的「無得」。
本分的眼：所無得的，是「菩提這個實法」
這一分極短，只有一問一印。須菩提問：「世尊！佛得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，為無所得耶？」——佛所成就的無上正覺，是不是其實無所得？佛即印可：「如是，如是！我於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提乃至無有少法可得，是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」一句問得斬截，一句印得決定，中間沒有半點鋪陳，直顯一個「無得」。
要看清這一分的眼，先要分清它無得的是什麼。前面分一至十六，即非施於「相、眾生、福德」——破的是把外境當實有的我執（人我），淨的是煩惱障。從樞紐分十七起轉入法空，破的是把諸法當實有的法執（法我），淨的是所知障。這一分正落在後半：所「無得」的，不是別的，正是「菩提」自身——把無上正覺當成一個實有可證、可拿到手的法。窺基依世親判它「破第四疑」（菩提無得之疑），逕讀本分的「正覺」為「為令眾生斷除二障，得二菩提」。所以這「無得」遣的是法我、是所知障所執的那層「菩提為實法」之執，不是前半的人我。
「為無所得耶」：這是一個決定問
須菩提這一問，諸家異譯多作「佛問須菩提」（佛反問「如來得菩提嗎」，須菩提奉答「無所得」）；羅什傳本獨作「須菩提白佛言」，由須菩提直問而佛印可。這一句「為無所得耶」怎麼讀，窺基點得很要緊：「耶是問詞，不是不定詞」——不是「是不是有所得」那種游移不定的問，而是「真如理中佛得無上菩提不」的一個決定問：直問佛是不是無所得，所以佛就直印它「如是，如是」。問之斬截，印之決定，正為顯這「無得」是斷然的、不容游移的。
三性讀「無得之得」：菩提非無，所無者唯遍計
佛這一句印可——「（佛得）阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，乃至無有少法可得，是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」——正是三性的明文。順著看：
- 「阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」＝依他起：菩提不是沒有。它是親近善知識、聽聞正法、如法修習、善根滿足之後，契證真理而顯的果（窺基「如法修習，法隨法行，善根滿足故，契證真理，名為成就阿耨菩提」）——依眾緣而成、可名可說的果。菩提非無，所以末後仍「是名」菩提。
- 「乃至無有少法可得」＝遣遍計所執：所遣的，是凡夫在菩提上妄加的那層「實有一個可證、可得的法」之執。遍計所執就是這樣一層妄計：把無自性的東西，當成心外實在、可以拿到手的法。窺基說得明白：「真理之中，無如所執少有所得，名為菩提也」——真如理中，並沒有像你所執的那種「有一點點可得之法」。世親也說「彼菩提處無有一法可證」。要緊的是：所遣的這層「菩提為實法可得」之執，正屬法我、屬所知障所執，不是前半的人我。
- 「是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」＝立圓成、存假名：遣盡了「實得」的妄執之處，無實法可得的真如菩提宛然——這正是圓成實。圓成實是識遣盡遍計所執之後所顯的諸法實性、即真如。世親一偈收住：「法界不增減，淨平等自相」；窺基讀下文「是法平等」為「真如理無增減」。遣「實得」而存「真如所顯」，正是圓成之立。
般若用一個「無得」總說這件事，唯識則用三無性點明這「無」到底空的是什麼：遍計所執是「相無性」（所執的實法本來無相）、依他起是「生無性」（菩提沒有自然而生的自性，只依緣修而起）、圓成實是「勝義無性」（真如菩提離一切遍計，是勝義）。所以「無有少法可得」空的是那層遍計的實法，不是把依他的菩提果、圓成的真如也一併撥成斷滅——無得之後還有「是名」，真如菩提分明還在。
無得，正為斷所知障：二障與二菩提
那麼「無得」何以反成「得」？唯識看這層很直接。執「菩提為一可得之實法」，就落在能取、所取的對待裡——把心分成能得的我、所得的菩提，這正是遍計的根，也正是所知障。唯其遣盡這層法執、二取不生，所知障才斷；所知障斷，真如菩提才顯。所以「無有少法可得」不是落空，是斷障；無實法可得之處，正是真如菩提現前之時。
窺基依無著，把本分這段「正覺」讀為「能證、所證、觀照、實相」，並逕標其旨：「為令眾生斷除二障，得二菩提」——斷煩惱、所知二障，得法身菩提（斷所知障所顯）與報身菩提（斷煩惱障所顯）這二種菩提。這在唯識正叫轉依：轉捨阿賴耶識裡遍計所執的染污種子習氣，轉得圓成實的真如與大菩提。所以這一分的「無得之得」，落在唯識上看得分明：無一實法可得（遣遍計、斷所知障），而真如菩提宛然（顯圓成、得二菩提）——這「得」是轉依所顯的得，不是拿到一個什麼東西的得。
唯識為鏡：同一實相，經語與論語
以唯識為鏡讀這一分，不是說唯識的二障、轉依之學從金剛經流出——二障、二空、三性、轉依之說，自有其經源（解深密、瑜伽）與論本，般若另是一系，本經沒有什麼唯識的下游；而是同一「無得而真如宛然」之旨，金剛經以經語（無有少法可得·是名菩提）說，唯識以論語（遣遍計·斷所知障·轉依顯圓成）說，兩相對照，其義益顯。三十頌以二空遣二執而歸於「無得不思議，是出世間智」的轉依，正與本分「無有少法可得·是名菩提」相印；成唯識論說斷二障、證二果（大菩提·大涅槃），即本分「無得之得」的論語；辯中邊論辨無上乘真實之「無得·所知障淨」，亦與此後半法空相應；般若一系的心經「無智亦無得，以無所得故」，與本分同一無得法位——菩提無實法可得，方為菩提。一句收束：金剛經以經語說的「無有少法可得」，成唯識論以「斷所知障·遣法執·轉依得大菩提」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 (the wholly-imagined 遍計所執, the other-dependent 依他起, the perfectly-accomplished 圓成實), the three non-natures (三無性), the two graspings and two hindrances, and the transformation of the basis (轉依), to reflect the Diamond Sūtra’s single question and single seal of “non-attainment.” The mirror is not the sūtra: Yogācāra is not the source of the Diamond Sūtra but one mirror for reading it.
The Eye of This Division: What Is Non-Attained Is “Bodhi as a Real Dharma”
This division is extremely short, only one question and one seal. Subhūti asks: 「世尊！佛得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，為無所得耶？」— “World-Honored One, the Buddha’s attaining of anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi — is it in fact no attaining at all?” The Buddha at once confirms it: 「如是，如是！我於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提乃至無有少法可得，是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」— “So it is, so it is! In anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi there is not even the least dharma to attain; and this is named anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi.” The question put with decision, the seal set with finality, and between them not a trace of elaboration — disclosing directly a single “non-attainment.”
To see the eye of this division, first distinguish what it is that is non-attained. In Divisions 1–16, the “is-not” was applied to “marks, beings, merit” — breaking the self-clinging (person-self) that takes outer objects as really existent, purifying the affliction-hindrance. From the pivotal Division 17 the turn into dharma-emptiness begins, breaking the dharma-clinging (dharma-self) that takes dharmas as really existent, purifying the cognitive hindrance. This division falls squarely in the second half: what is “non-attained” is none other than bodhi itself — the taking of unsurpassed right awakening to be a really existent dharma that can be realized, can be got into one’s hand. Kuiji, following Vasubandhu, judges it to “break the fourth doubt” (the doubt that bodhi has no attainment), and reads the “right awakening” of this division directly as 「為令眾生斷除二障，得二菩提」— “to cause beings to cut off the two hindrances and attain the two bodhis.” So this “non-attainment” removes the dharma-self, that layer — clung to by the cognitive hindrance — of “bodhi as a real dharma,” not the person-self of the first half.
“Is It No Attaining at All?”: This Is a Question of Decision
Subhūti’s question, in the various translations, mostly reads “the Buddha questions Subhūti” (the Buddha asks back, “does the Tathāgata attain bodhi?” and Subhūti answers, “no attaining”); the Kumārajīva-transmitted text alone has “Subhūti addressed the Buddha,” with Subhūti asking directly and the Buddha confirming. How to read this line “is it no attaining at all?” Kuiji points out a vital thing: 「耶是問詞，不是不定詞」— “‘耶’ is an interrogative particle, not a particle of indecision” — not a wavering question of “is there or is there not attaining,” but a question of decision, 「真如理中佛得無上菩提不」, “in the principle of suchness, does the Buddha attain unsurpassed bodhi or not” — asking straight whether the Buddha is without attainment, so that the Buddha confirms it straight, “so it is, so it is.” The question cut clean, the seal decisive — just to disclose that this “non-attainment” is categorical, admitting no wavering.
Reading “the Attainment of Non-Attainment” Through the Three Natures: Bodhi Is Not Nothing; What Is Non-Attained Is Only the Wholly-Imagined
The Buddha’s confirmation — “(the Buddha attains) anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi; there is not even the least dharma to attain; it is named anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi” — is precisely the express text of the three natures. Read in order:
- “Anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi” = dependent-arising (依他起): bodhi is not nothing. It is the fruit disclosed by realizing-and-corroborating the true principle after drawing near good friends, hearing the right Dharma, practicing as the Dharma directs, and fulfilling the roots of good (Kuiji: 「如法修習，法隨法行，善根滿足故，契證真理，名為成就阿耨菩提」, “practicing as the Dharma directs, dharma following upon dharma, the roots of good fulfilled, one realizes-and-corroborates the true principle, named achieving anuttara-bodhi”) — a fruit accomplished in reliance on conditions, nameable and speakable. Bodhi is not nothing, so at the end it is still “named” bodhi.
- “There is not the least dharma to attain” = removing the wholly-imagined (遣遍計所執): what is removed is the layer of clinging that the ordinary person falsely adds onto bodhi — “a really existent dharma that can be realized, can be attained.” The wholly-imagined (遍計所執) is just such a layer of false reckoning: taking what has no own-nature for a thing really existent outside the mind, a thing that can be got into one’s hand. Kuiji says it plainly: 「真理之中，無如所執少有所得，名為菩提也」— “within the true principle there is no ‘the least to be attained’ such as you grasp; this is named bodhi.” Vasubandhu too says 「彼菩提處無有一法可證」, “in that place of bodhi there is not one dharma to be corroborated.” What matters: this clinging removed — “bodhi as a real dharma that can be attained” — belongs to the dharma-self, to what the cognitive hindrance grasps, not to the person-self of the first half.
- “It is named anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi” = establishing the perfectly-accomplished, preserving the provisional name (立圓成、存假名): right where the false clinging to “real attainment” is removed, the suchness-bodhi in which there is no real dharma to attain is vividly there — this is precisely the perfectly-accomplished (圓成實). The perfectly-accomplished is the real nature of dharmas, that is, suchness, disclosed once consciousness has removed the wholly-imagined. Vasubandhu’s verse gathers it: 「法界不增減，淨平等自相」— “the Dharma-realm neither increases nor decreases, its pure, equal own-mark”; Kuiji reads the text below, “this Dharma is equal,” as 「真如理無增減」, “the principle of suchness neither increases nor decreases.” To remove “real attainment” while preserving “what suchness discloses” is just the establishing of the perfectly-accomplished.
Prajñā states this matter summarily as “non-attainment”; Yogācāra uses the three non-natures (三無性) to point out what this “non” empties: the wholly-imagined is “non-nature of mark” (相無性, the real dharma grasped is from the first without mark), the other-dependent is “non-nature of arising” (生無性, bodhi has no self-so arising own-nature, arising only in reliance on conditioned practice), and the perfectly-accomplished is “non-nature in the ultimate sense” (勝義無性, suchness-bodhi, apart from all the wholly-imagined, is the ultimate). So “there is not the least dharma to attain” empties that layer of wholly-imagined real dharma; it does not sweep the other-dependent bodhi-fruit and the perfectly-accomplished suchness into annihilation — after “non-attainment” there is still “it is named,” and suchness-bodhi is plainly still there.
Non-Attainment Is Precisely for Cutting Off the Cognitive Hindrance: the Two Hindrances and the Two Bodhis
So how does “non-attainment” instead become “attainment”? Yogācāra sees this layer directly. To grasp “bodhi as one attainable real dharma” is to fall into the duality of grasper and grasped (能取、所取) — to split the mind into the self that attains and the bodhi attained, which is just the root of the wholly-imagined and just the cognitive hindrance. Only when this layer of dharma-clinging is removed and the two graspings do not arise is the cognitive hindrance cut off; and only when the cognitive hindrance is cut off does suchness-bodhi appear. So “there is not the least dharma to attain” is no falling into emptiness; it is the cutting-off of the hindrance — right where there is no real dharma to attain is the very moment suchness-bodhi appears before one.
Kuiji, following Asaṅga, reads this passage’s “right awakening” as “the corroborating, the corroborated, the contemplative illumination, and the real mark,” and states its import outright: 「為令眾生斷除二障，得二菩提」— “to cause beings to cut off the two hindrances and attain the two bodhis” — cutting off the affliction-hindrance and the cognitive hindrance, and attaining the Dharma-body bodhi (disclosed by cutting off the cognitive hindrance) and the reward-body bodhi (disclosed by cutting off the affliction-hindrance), these two bodhis. In Yogācāra this is exactly named the transformation of the basis (轉依, āśraya-parāvṛtti): the turning-away of the defiled seed-habits of the wholly-imagined within the ālaya-vijñāna and the turning-toward the suchness of the perfectly-accomplished and great bodhi. So this division’s “attainment of non-attainment,” read on Yogācāra, is plain: no one real dharma to attain (removing the wholly-imagined, cutting off the cognitive hindrance), while suchness-bodhi is vividly there (disclosing the perfectly-accomplished, attaining the two bodhis) — this “attainment” is the attainment disclosed by the transformation of the basis, not the attainment of getting some thing.
Yogācāra as Mirror: the Same Reality, Sūtra-Language and Treatise-Language
To read this division with Yogācāra as a mirror is not to say that the Yogācāra science of the two hindrances and the transformation of the basis flowed out of the Diamond Sūtra — the teachings of the two hindrances, the two emptinesses, the three natures, and the transformation of the basis have their own scriptural sources (the Saṃdhinirmocana, the Yogācārabhūmi) and treatises, the Prajñā corpus being another lineage, and this sūtra has no Yogācāra downstream. Rather, the same import — “non-attainment, while suchness is vividly there” — is stated by the Diamond Sūtra in sūtra-language (there is not the least dharma to attain · it is named bodhi) and by Yogācāra in treatise-language (removing the wholly-imagined · cutting off the cognitive hindrance · the transformation of the basis disclosing the perfectly-accomplished); set side by side, the meaning shows the more clearly. The Thirty Verses use the two emptinesses to remove the two graspings and come home to the transformation of the basis as 「無得不思議，是出世間智」, “the inconceivable of non-attainment, the supramundane wisdom,” which seals exactly with this division’s “there is not the least dharma to attain · it is named bodhi.” The Cheng weishi lun speaks of cutting off the two hindrances and corroborating the two fruits (great bodhi · great nirvāṇa) — the treatise-language of this division’s “attainment of non-attainment.” The Madhyānta-vibhāga distinguishes, within the truth of the unsurpassed vehicle, the “non-attainment · the purity of the cognitive hindrance,” which accords with this second-half dharma-emptiness. Within the Prajñā lineage, the Heart Sūtra’s “no wisdom and also no attainment, because of non-attaining” shares the same position of non-attainment as this division — bodhi has no real dharma to attain, and only thus is it bodhi. To seal it in one line: what the Diamond Sūtra states in sūtra-language as “there is not the least dharma to attain,” and what the Cheng weishi lun states in the technical language of “cutting off the cognitive hindrance · removing dharma-clinging · the transformation of the basis attaining great bodhi,” are one and the same thing 〔this convergence is already set out by Shi Huijing in From the Hundred Dharmas to the Diamond (S5-P10)〕.
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 22 · No Dharma Can Be Attained · exposition · Spring 2026
考據Apparatus
一、科判定位（無得菩提 · §17 後半 · 二障所本 · 加重）
| 科判系統 | 此分之位 |
|---|---|
| 昭明 32分 | 分二十二 無法可得分 |
| 釋慧鏡 §17 二分 | 後半（法空·破四見·所知障；樞紐分十七後·法空位之「菩提非實法可得」，所無得者乃法我） |
| 道安 三分 | 正宗分 · 第二周 · 證道之佛地具足 |
| 無著十八住 T1510 | 第十七住 證道（淨心住處 [0758c03–04]）中，佛地六種具足攝轉依之心具足·第二「為正覺故」——「為正覺故，經言『須菩提！於意云何？頗有法如來正覺阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不』如是等」[0758a16–17]；心具足攝念處·正覺·施設大利法·攝取法身·不住生死涅槃·行住淨 [0757c29–0758a02] |
| 世親 二十七疑 T1511/T1513 | 「菩提無得」之疑——「若如來不得一法名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者，云何離於上上證，轉轉得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」（T1511 [0793c07–09]）；窺基判為「破第四疑·第二展轉釋中第二疑」T1700 [0150a26–28] |
| 吉藏（三論）T1699 | 「今則開得說為二章經：前章經明無所說，此章明無所得也」[0121b12–14]（前章＝分二十一無說，此章＝分二十二無得） |
| 智顗（天台）T1698 | 「『佛得菩提』下，第二明習應，有問答前應後習」[0082c01]；答中「無有少法可得」=「寂滅無得，道之至也」[0082c03–05] |
| 窺基（唯識）T1700 | 依世親「破第四疑」[0150a27]；無著「此是心具足中第二為正覺故，即謂能證、所證、觀照、實相也……謂此為令眾生斷除二障，得二菩提，而有此文，故言為正覺故也」[0150b07–11] |
無得菩提義：此分承樞紐（分十七 究竟無我·法空）後，以「佛得菩提乃至無有少法可得」顯菩提非一可證之實法——所「無得」者，乃所知障所執之「菩提為實有可得之法」（法我），非前半（分一至十六）之「相·眾生」（人我）。古德三家俱判本分為「無得」之文（吉藏「此章明無所得」、智顗「寂滅無得」、窺基「真理之中無如所執少有所得名為菩提」[0150b18–19]），且世親二譯論偈逕標「彼處無少法，知菩提無上」（T1511 [0793c12]／T1513 [0882b23]「少法無有故，無上覺應知」）。窺基（依無著）逕讀此「正覺」之文為「令眾生斷除二障，得二菩提」[0150b10–11]——即釋慧鏡 §17 二分「後半破法見·斷所知障」之古德所本（與樞紐分十七窺基「第二周為斷障，障即所知也」一脈）。本分「即非」之施，於「菩提·法」而非「相·眾生」（見目三）。
二、異譯對勘（六漢譯 · 無得菩提一段）
要句：佛得菩提為無所得耶（問）/ 無有少法（如來得／可得）/ 是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提
| 版本 | 無得菩提一段（逐字節錄） | [出處] |
|---|---|---|
| 羅什 T235（原典） | 須菩提白佛言：「世尊！佛得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，為無所得耶？」「如是，如是！須菩提！我於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提乃至無有少法可得，是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 | 0751c20–c23 |
| 菩提流支 T236a | 佛言：「須菩提！於意云何？如來得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提耶？」須菩提言：「不也！世尊！世尊，無有少法如來得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」佛言：「如是，如是！須菩提！我於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，乃至無有少法可得，是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 | 0756a20–a25 |
| 真諦 T237 | 「須菩提！汝意云何？頗有一法如來所得，名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不？」須菩提言：「不得，世尊！無有一法如來所得，名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」佛言：「如是，須菩提！如是。乃至無有如微塵法，如來所捨，如來所得，是故說名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提平等平等。」 | 0765c02–c07 |
| 達摩笈多 T238 | 「彼何意念？善實！雖然，有法若如來無上正遍知證覺？」命者善實言：「無有彼，世尊！有法若如來無上正遍知。」世尊言：「如是，如是！善實！如是，如是！微小彼中法無有、不可得，彼故說名無上正遍知者。」 | 0770c20–c25 |
| 玄奘 T220⑨ | 佛告善現：「於汝意云何？頗有少法，如來、應、正等覺現證無上正等菩提耶？」具壽善現白佛言：「世尊！如我解佛所說義者，無有少法，如來、應、正等覺現證無上正等菩提。」佛言：「善現！如是！如是！於中少法無有無得，故名無上正等菩提。」 | 0984c16–c21 |
| 義淨 T239 | 「妙生！於汝意云何？佛得無上正等覺時，頗有少法所證不？」妙生言：「實無有法是佛所證。」佛告妙生：「如是，如是！此中無有少法可得，故名無上正等菩提。」 | 0774c18–c21 |
異文所繫：
- 問端之歸屬：羅什獨作「須菩提白佛言：『佛得菩提，為無所得耶？』」——由須菩提反問而佛印可；餘五本俱作「佛問須菩提」（流支「如來得菩提耶」、真諦「頗有一法如來所得不」、笈多「有法若如來無上正遍知證覺」、玄奘「頗有少法現證無上正等菩提耶」、義淨「頗有少法所證不」），由須菩提奉答「無有（少法）」，佛復印「如是如是」。羅什之「為無所得耶」一問，窺基明判「耶是問詞，不是不定詞……直問佛云『如來無所得耶』，所以佛即印之」
[0150b03–04]——即羅什傳本作「決定問」（問佛是否無得），故佛得印可；餘本作「佛牒疑反問」。此問端之歸屬，正繫於本分「破菩提無得疑」之問答結構（見目四）。 - 「無有少法（可得）／無有一法／微小法無有」：羅什、流支、玄奘、義淨作「少法」（羅什·流支「無有少法」、玄奘「少法無有無得」、義淨「無有少法可得」）；真諦作「無有一法」並益以「無有如微塵法，如來所捨如來所得」
[0765c05–06]；笈多作「微小彼中法無有、不可得」[0770c24]。「少法／一法／微小法」者，皆顯「菩提中無一豪實法可得」之義——世親論「彼菩提處無有一法可證」T1511 [0793c16]、義淨論「於此乃至無有少法能過」T1513 [0882b26]。真諦「所捨／所得」雙標、笈多「不可得」與羅什「乃至無有少法可得」同詮「畢竟無得」（見目五）。 - 能斷系與「平等」之連屬：真諦於印可句逕接「是故說名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提平等平等」
[0765c06–07]，將分二十二（無得）與分二十三（是法平等）連為一氣；笈多亦於下文逕接「平等正法，彼不中有不平等」[0770c25–26]。羅什、流支、玄奘、義淨則以「復次」別起「是法平等」一段（分二十三）。世親論偈「彼處無少法，知菩提無上；法界不增減，淨平等自相」T1511 [0793c12–13]即以一偈貫「無得（分二十二）」與「平等（分二十三）」——無得與平等本一義之二面（菩提無實法可得，故法界平等無高下），真諦·笈多之連屬正顯此論本一貫（見目四）。 - 「如是，如是」之重：六本印可俱作「如是，如是」（笈多「如是，如是！善實！如是，如是！」四舉），顯佛於「無得」之決定印可。
三、即非・三性（眼 · 法空 · 破四見 · 所知障 · 加重）
本分之即非施於「菩提·法」自身：「我於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提乃至無有少法可得，是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」[0751c22–23]——所無得者，乃法我（執菩提為一實有可證之法），非前半之相·眾生（人我）。此即§17 後半「法空·破四見·所知障」之施於菩提一法。
「（佛得）阿耨多羅三藐三菩提 — 乃至無有少法可得 — 是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」映三性（法空位）：
- 阿耨多羅三藐三菩提（X）即依他起——緣修一切善法所顯、可說可詮之菩提（窺基「要近善知識，聽聞……如法修習，法隨法行，善根滿足故，契證真理，名為成就阿耨菩提」
[0150c12–14]）。菩提非無（依他可說之果），故「是名」。 - 乃至無有少法可得即遣遍計所執——非分別所執之「實有一法可證可得之菩提」（窺基「真理之中，無如所執少有所得，名為菩提也」
[0150b18–19]；世親「彼菩提處無有一法可證」T1511 [0793c16]）。所遣者，正是「菩提為一可得之實法」之法執——此屬所知障所執（法我），非前半之我執（人我）。 - 是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提即立圓成實——無實法可得之真如菩提（世親偈「法界不增減，淨平等自相」
T1511 [0793c13]；窺基「是法平等者，謂真如理無增減故」[0150b23–24]）。遣「實得」之執而存「真如所顯」之菩提，正圓成之立。
本分之眼（★後半·法空）：即非一式，至此分施於「菩提·法」自身——非前半（分一至十六）施於「相·眾生·福德」之外境（人我·破四相·煩惱障），乃後半（分十七至卅二）施於「菩提之為一可證實法」之細執（法我·破四見·所知障）。此正樞紐分十七「我空轉法空·煩惱障轉所知障」之續行：分十七判「實無有法發菩提者·無有法名為菩薩」（破「我為菩薩」之執），本分二十二進破「菩提為一可得之法」之執——古德「第二周斷所知障」（窺基依世親，分十七 [0127c01–03]）之具體一施。窺基（依無著）逕標本分「正覺」之文為「令眾生斷除二障，得二菩提」[0150b10–11]，二菩提即法身菩提（阿耨多羅·斷所知障所顯）與報身菩提（三藐三菩提·斷煩惱障所顯）[0150b12–14]——此即非映三性之讀，見釋慧鏡《即非三段式映射唯識三性》〔摘自 S5-P01〕；本分為其於「菩提無得·法空」位之一施。「無得之得」（無實法可得而真如菩提宛然）即三十頌「無得·轉依」之經語對應〔摘自 S5-P06〕（見目七）。
四、諸家異釋（古德 · 菩提無得·破第四疑·二障二菩提 · 加重）
核心 加重 ——世親《金剛般若論》偈（彼處無少法·知菩提無上），二漢譯並存： 世親以「破第四疑（菩提無得之疑）」立本分，偈「彼處無少法，知菩提無上」釋「無有少法可得」，逐項錨於經文；二譯名異義一。窺基依世親、無著，逕讀本分「正覺」之文為「斷除二障、得二菩提」。
世親 T1511（菩提流支譯）：先設疑——「復有疑，若如來不得一法名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者，云何離於上上證，轉轉得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？自下經文為斷此疑，示現非證法名為得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」[0793c07–10]。論偈 [0793c12–15]：
「彼處無少法，知菩提無上；法界不增減，淨平等自相。有無上方便，及離於漏法；是故非淨法，即是清淨法。」
「此明何義？彼菩提處無有一法可證，名為阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。如經『世尊！無有少法如來得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提法』故」[0793c16–18]；「偈言『法界不增減』，不增減者，是法平等，是故名無上，以更無上上故」[0793c19–20]；「諸佛如來清淨法身平等無差別，於彼處無有勝者，是故說無上」[0793c22–23]。〔偈後半「有無上方便·及離於漏法」釋分二十三「修一切善法·即非善法」（無漏善法），與本分無得菩提一偈貫攝。〕
世親 T1513（義淨譯）：先設難——「若言如來曾無有法是所覺知者，云何離其後後正知次第而名無上正等覺耶？為答此難，『非是有法可覺方名無上正覺』」[0882b19–22]。頌 [0882b23–25]：
「少法無有故，無上覺應知，由法界不增，清淨平等性，及方便無上。」
「於此乃至無有少法能過故名無上。又復法界無有增故，其法平等故，名無上上，上性無故。又復如來法身清淨平等故，其法無不齊等、無有少增，故名無上。又復其法是無我自相，此即高，高性無，故名無上」[0882b26–c01]。
〔二譯對位：彼處無少法／少法無有故（知菩提無上／無上覺應知）· 法界不增減·淨平等自相／由法界不增·清淨平等性——同一世親論之二漢譯，名異義一。二譯俱以一偈／頌貫攝「無得菩提（分二十二）」與「法界平等·無漏善法（分二十三）」，顯「無得」與「平等」本一義。〕
無著 T1510（達摩笈多譯）：此分屬十八住之第十七證道（淨心住處 [0758c03–04]），於證道後佛地六種具足攝轉依（國土淨·無上見智淨·隨形好·相身·語·心具足 [0757c28–0758a01]）中之心具足·第二「為正覺故」——「於心具足中為念處故……為正覺故，經言『須菩提！於意云何？頗有法如來正覺阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不』如是等」[0758a14–17]。〔無著此段止安立經文之住處對位（心具足六事：念處·正覺·施設大利法·攝取法身·不住生死涅槃·行住淨 [0757c29–0758a02]）；其「正覺＝能證所證觀照實相·斷二障得二菩提」之展開，窺基引無著釋足之，見下窺基條 [0150b07–11]。〕
吉藏（三論）T1699：科為「開得說為二章經：前章經明無所說，此章明無所得也」[0121b12–14]（前章＝分二十一無說，此章＝分二十二無得）。釋來意：「上明無得菩提，破實得之疑；今明無得，破舉因行階級證果實得疑也」[0121b10–11]。釋文：「文三：初、佛牒疑情反問善吉，次、善吉奉答明佛無少法得菩提。若有一豪之得則不得道，以畢竟無得爾乃得道耳。以得果實無一法可得，行因實無一行可行，無所得故始得果，無所行故乃是行因也」[0121b14–18]。釋印可「述四義釋無上菩提」[0121b18–19]：「初即述以無所得故名無上也；二、以體悟法界平等義，故名無上菩提；以無我無人故得菩提者，第三義，彼菩提體無二種我，名無上也……『修一切善法』者……此第四義就因門釋無上」[0121b19–27]。〔吉藏「四義」貫分二十二（無得·初義）與分二十三（平等·無我·善法·二三四義）。〕
智顗（天台）T1698：科為「『佛得菩提』下，第二明習應，有問答前應後習」[0082c01]。釋問答：「佛，人也；菩提，道也。佛得道故說以示人，而言無法可說，未審得道不？答中乃至『無有少法可得』，相盡虛通謂之菩提，菩提無相有何可得？寂滅無得，道之至也」[0082c02–05]。釋平等（分二十三）：「『是法平等』下，結成菩提義也。人無貴賤，法無好醜，平等菩提義也」[0082c05–06]。
窺基（唯識）T1700：依世親「破第四疑也，即是第二展轉釋中第二疑也」[0150a26–27]，疑情「若如來不得一法，名無上正等正覺者，云何離於上上證轉轉得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提耶」[0150a28–b01]。釋「為無所得耶」：「謂耶是問詞，不是不定詞也。直問佛云，如來無所得耶？所以佛即印之……故今問意云，真如理中佛得無上菩提不」[0150b03–06]。引無著釋「正覺」：「此是心具足中第二為正覺故，即謂能證、所證、觀照、實相也。故《解深密》云『菩提菩提斷，俱名為菩提』；《大智度》云『說智及智處，俱名為般若』也。謂此為令眾生斷除二障，得二菩提，而有此文，故言為正覺故也」[0150b07–11]；「文有其五，初、顯示阿耨多羅語，謂無上覺即是法身菩提也；次、已下顯示三藐三菩提，謂正覺即是報身菩提也」[0150b11–14]。釋印可：「此第二印問愜真也。謂真理之中，無如所執少有所得，名為菩提也」[0150b18–19]。釋平等（分二十三）：「是法平等者，謂真如理無增減故；無有高下者，謂有為法有取捨……無為無勝劣可取捨故，言無高下也」[0150b23–27]；釋「無我等·修善」之有空雙遣：「我、人空故，須遣自妄心；依、圓有故，須存其善法」[0150c17–18]。
古德三家異流（三論·天台·唯識）於本分同歸世親偈：無得菩提＝彼處無少法·知菩提無上（畢竟無一豪實法可得，乃名菩提）；其無得之所以＝法界不增減·淨平等自相（真如理無增減，故無高下可得）。吉藏「畢竟無得爾乃得道·無所得故始得果」、智顗「相盡虛通·寂滅無得，道之至也」、窺基（依世親無著）「真理中無如所執少有所得·為令眾生斷除二障得二菩提」——逐項錨於「佛得菩提·無有少法可得·是名菩提」。此即本分「無得之得」之古德定讀，亦§17 後半「斷所知障·破法見」之經文所本（窺基逕讀本分為斷二障·得二菩提）。
五、術語
阿耨多羅三藐三菩提 anuttara-samyak-saṃbodhi（無上正等正覺；窺基「無上覺即是法身菩提，正覺即是報身菩提」[0150b12–14]）·
無有少法可得 na ... kaścid dharmo ... upalabhyate（畢竟無得；世親「彼菩提處無有一法可證」T1511 [0793c16]、義淨「於此乃至無有少法能過」T1513 [0882b26]；羅什·流支·玄奘·義淨作「少法」、真諦作「一法」「無有如微塵法」、笈多作「微小彼中法無有不可得」）·
二菩提（法身菩提／報身菩提）dharmakāya-bodhi ／ saṃbhogakāya-bodhi（窺基依無著「斷除二障，得二菩提」[0150b10–11]）·
二障 dvividham āvaraṇam（煩惱障 kleśāvaraṇa ／ 所知障 jñeyāvaraṇa；本分屬後半·所執者為法我·障攝所知；窺基「為令眾生斷除二障」[0150b10]）·
法界不增減 anūnatva-apūrṇatva ／ dharmadhātu（世親偈「法界不增減，淨平等自相」T1511 [0793c13]；真如理無增減·平等自相）·
轉轉證（上上證·轉轉得）（世親「云何離於上上證，轉轉得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」T1511 [0793c08–09]；窺基「上上證轉轉得」[0150b01]，謂菩薩地地展轉勝進之證）·
能證／所證（觀照／實相）（無著「正覺，即謂能證、所證、觀照、實相」，窺基引 [0150b07–08]）。〔梵文發音輔助；「少法／一法／微小法」之譯異見目二。〕
六、譬喻・修辭（無得之得 · 問答之翻轉）
本分無具象譬喻（虛空喻在分四、須彌喻在分十·十一·十七、忍辱仙人喻在分十四）。修辭之要在「無得」之決定問答與「得／無得」之翻轉：
- 決定問之直問直印：羅什作「須菩提白佛言：『佛得菩提，為無所得耶？』」——一決定問（窺基「耶是問詞，不是不定詞……直問佛云如來無所得耶」
[0150b03–04]），佛即直印「如是，如是」。問之斬截（為無所得耶）與印之決定（如是如是），無迂迴鋪陳，唯一問一印，直顯「無得」之斷。餘五本作「佛牒疑反問」（吉藏「佛牒疑情反問善吉，次善吉奉答」[0121b14–15]），亦一問一答一印之三句直筆。 - 「得／無得」之翻轉：正言「佛得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」（極言所證之尊），陡然以「乃至無有少法可得」翻轉（所得之中無一豪實法），復以「是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」收於假名（無實得而真如菩提宛然）。「得」之名（依他可說之果）與其體之「無得」（無實法可證）相形——智顗「相盡虛通謂之菩提，菩提無相有何可得？寂滅無得，道之至也」
[0082c04–05]、吉藏「無所得故始得果」[0121b17]。 - 此「無得之得」（無實法可得而菩提宛然）之筆，與分八「福多而即非福德性」、分十「莊嚴而即非莊嚴」、分十八「悉知而即非心」同一翻轉之構——皆「遣自性（即非）而存可說（是名）」。此目於本分（無得菩提之問答翻轉）見其修辭，具象譬喻則於分四·十四·廿六·卅二加重。
七、互讀
- 三十頌（T1586）：二空·轉依（v.29「無得不思議，是出世間智」·圓成實）——本分「無有少法可得·是名菩提」即三十頌「無得·轉依」之經語對應（菩提無實法可得，乃轉依所顯之真如，非一可得之實法）。
- 成唯識論（T1585）：二障·二執（所知障所執之法我）·二菩提（大菩提·大涅槃，斷二障所得）——本分窺基「斷除二障，得二菩提」
〔見目四〕即成唯識「斷二障·證二果（菩提·涅槃）」之經語對應；「無有少法可得」即遣所知障所執「菩提為實法」之法執。 - 辯中邊論（T1600）：辯真實品·無上乘真實（無得·所知障淨）——本分「菩提無得·斷所知障」之論本對應（後半法空·所知障所攝）。
- 二十論（T1590）：唯識無境·遣所執實法——「乃至無有少法可得」即遣「菩提」為心外實法之執，與二十論破實境一脈（法空·遣遍計實法）。
- 心經（T251）：「無智亦無得」「以無所得故」——本分「無有少法可得·是名菩提」即心經「無得」之法位（菩提無實法可得，方為菩提）。
本分「無有少法可得·是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」，即三十頌·成唯識論「無得·轉依·斷二障得二菩提」之經語對應；「無有少法可得」即心經「無智亦無得·以無所得故」之同一無得法位。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「無有少法可得」一語，成唯識論以「斷所知障·遣法執·轉依得大菩提」之技術語說同一事。「無得之得」即「應無所住而生其心」之轉依義〔摘自 S5-P06；古德見目四〕。〔約定：只列實相關者，不强挂——系聯，非湊數。攝大乘論於本分無正面對位，從闕。成唯識論 起草中，穩定名引，俟成增鏈。〕
八、東西對觀（西方視角 · 對觀，非裁奪）
- 「無有少法可得·是名菩提」之無得之得 ↔ 西方否定神學之 via negativa（終極不可作對象把捉，唯遮詮而顯——偽狄奧尼修斯、艾克哈特之「無」）：西方多就終極不可對象化立論（菩提不可如一物而得）；古德／唯識讀「無得」非僅不可言詮之遮，乃遣所知障所執「菩提為實法」之法執（窺基「真理中無如所執少有所得名為菩提」
[0150b18–19]），是斷障·轉依所顯之圓成，非純否定——「無得」之後有「是名」（真如菩提宛然），故「無得之得」非單義之否定神學。 - 「為無所得耶」之決定問 ↔ 西方知識論之「知識作為對象之佔有（having）」與其反題：西方或讀為「菩提非可佔有之知識對象」；古德以「能證·所證·觀照·實相」（無著
[0150b07–08]）言菩提乃證智與真如之冥合，非主體佔有客體之「得」——「得果實無一法可得」（吉藏[0121b16–17]），是能所雙泯之證，非認知之佔有。 - 「斷除二障·得二菩提」之轉依 ↔ 西方哲學之「轉化（transformation）／皈依（conversion）」（雅斯培「臨界境況」、宗教哲學之根本轉向）：可對觀；然唯識「轉依」非僅心態之轉向，乃斷二障（煩惱·所知）·轉八識成四智·得二果（菩提·涅槃）之具體修證階位（地地展轉「上上證·轉轉得」
T1511 [0793c08–09]），是有位次·有所斷·有所證之行果，非籠統之精神轉化。 - 對觀之要：西方傾向以「無得·不可得」為否定神學·不可言詮之命題（終極何以不可把捉）；古德以「無有少法可得」為斷所知障·遣法執·轉依顯真如菩提之修證（所無得者乃法我之執，無得正為斷障所顯之圓成）。命題之遮詮與修證之斷障，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 [0751c20–c23]（原典 · 無法可得分）。六譯本無得菩提一段 [出處] 見目二：流支 T0236a [0756a20–a25] · 真諦 T0237 [0765c02–c07] · 笈多 T0238 [0770c20–c25] · 玄奘 T220⑨ [0984c16–c21] · 義淨 T0239 [0774c18–c21]。 科判／論本：無著 T1510a [0757c28–0758a02·0758a14–a17·0758c03–04] · 世親 T1511 [0793c07–0794a05] · 世親 T1513 [0882b20–0882c09]。 古德：吉藏 T1699 [0121b04–0121c02] · 智顗 T1698 [0082c01–c06] · 窺基 T1700 [0150a25–0150c18]。
1 · Placement in the Sectioning Schemes (no-attaining bodhi · §17 second half · the source of the two hindrances · weighted)
| Sectioning scheme | Placement of this division |
|---|---|
| Zhaoming 32 divisions | Division 22, No Dharma Can Be Attained (無法可得分) |
| Shi Huijing §17 two-part | Second half (dharma-emptiness · breaking the four views · the cognitive hindrance; after the pivot division 17, in the dharma-emptiness position, “bodhi is not a real dharma that can be attained,” what is not-attained being the self-of-dharmas) |
| Dao'an's three-part schema | Main-teaching division · second cycle · the buddha-ground perfections of the Path-of-vision |
| Asaṅga's eighteen abodes, T1510 | Within the seventeenth abode, the Path-of-vision (the abode of the purified mind [0758c03–04]), among the six buddha-ground perfections subsuming the transformation of the basis, the mind perfection · the second, “for the sake of right awakening” — 「為正覺故，經言『須菩提！於意云何？頗有法如來正覺阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不』如是等」[0758a16–17]; the mind perfection subsuming the mindfulness-foundation · right awakening · setting forth the dharma of great benefit · taking up the dharma-body · not abiding in saṃsāra or nirvāṇa · purity of conduct-and-abiding [0757c29–0758a02] |
| Vasubandhu's twenty-seven doubts, T1511/T1513 | The doubt “bodhi is not attained” — 「若如來不得一法名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者，云何離於上上證，轉轉得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 (T1511 [0793c07–09]); Kuiji judges it 「破第四疑·第二展轉釋中第二疑」T1700 [0150a26–28] |
| Jizang (Three-Treatise), T1699 | 「今則開得說為二章經：前章經明無所說，此章明無所得也」[0121b12–14] (the former chapter = division 21, no-speaking; this chapter = division 22, no-attaining) |
| Zhiyi (Tiantai), T1698 | 「『佛得菩提』下，第二明習應，有問答前應後習」[0082c01]; in the answer 「無有少法可得」=「寂滅無得，道之至也」[0082c03–05] |
| Kuiji (Yogācāra), T1700 | Following Vasubandhu's “cutting the fourth doubt” [0150a27]; Asaṅga 「此是心具足中第二為正覺故，即謂能證、所證、觀照、實相也……謂此為令眾生斷除二障，得二菩提，而有此文，故言為正覺故也」[0150b07–11] |
Sense of no-attaining bodhi: following the pivot (division 17, ultimately no-self · dharma-emptiness), this division, through 「佛得菩提乃至無有少法可得」, shows that bodhi is not a realizable real dharma — what is “not-attained” is the “bodhi as a really-existent attainable dharma” grasped by the cognitive hindrance (the self-of-dharmas), not the first half's (divisions 1–16) “marks · beings” (the self-of-persons). The three ancient masters all judge this division as the text of “no-attaining” (Jizang 「此章明無所得」, Zhiyi 「寂滅無得」, Kuiji 「真理之中無如所執少有所得名為菩提」[0150b18–19]), and the verses of Vasubandhu's two recensions mark outright 「彼處無少法，知菩提無上」 (T1511 [0793c12]／T1513 [0882b23]「少法無有故，無上覺應知」). Kuiji (following Asaṅga) reads this “right awakening” text outright as “to make beings cut the two hindrances, attain the two bodhis” [0150b10–11] — that is, the ancient-master source of Shi Huijing's §17 two-part “the second half breaks the dharma-view · cuts the cognitive hindrance” (of one lineage with division 17's Kuiji 「第二周為斷障，障即所知也」 at the pivot). The division's “is-not” is applied to “bodhi · a dharma” and not to “marks · beings” (see register 3).
2 · Collation of the Variant Translations (six Chinese versions · the no-attaining-bodhi passage)
Key passage: in the Buddha's attaining of bodhi, is there nothing attained (the question) / there is not even the slightest dharma (the Tathāgata attains / can be attained) / this is called anuttara-samyak-saṃbodhi
| Version | The no-attaining-bodhi passage (verbatim excerpt) | [loc] |
|---|---|---|
| Kumārajīva T235 (root) | 須菩提白佛言：「世尊！佛得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，為無所得耶？」「如是，如是！須菩提！我於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提乃至無有少法可得，是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 | 0751c20–c23 |
| Bodhiruci T236a | 佛言：「須菩提！於意云何？如來得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提耶？」須菩提言：「不也！世尊！世尊，無有少法如來得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」佛言：「如是，如是！須菩提！我於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，乃至無有少法可得，是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 | 0756a20–a25 |
| Paramārtha T237 | 「須菩提！汝意云何？頗有一法如來所得，名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不？」須菩提言：「不得，世尊！無有一法如來所得，名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」佛言：「如是，須菩提！如是。乃至無有如微塵法，如來所捨，如來所得，是故說名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提平等平等。」 | 0765c02–c07 |
| Dharmagupta T238 | 「彼何意念？善實！雖然，有法若如來無上正遍知證覺？」命者善實言：「無有彼，世尊！有法若如來無上正遍知。」世尊言：「如是，如是！善實！如是，如是！微小彼中法無有、不可得，彼故說名無上正遍知者。」 | 0770c20–c25 |
| Xuanzang T220⑨ | 佛告善現：「於汝意云何？頗有少法，如來、應、正等覺現證無上正等菩提耶？」具壽善現白佛言：「世尊！如我解佛所說義者，無有少法，如來、應、正等覺現證無上正等菩提。」佛言：「善現！如是！如是！於中少法無有無得，故名無上正等菩提。」 | 0984c16–c21 |
| Yijing T239 | 「妙生！於汝意云何？佛得無上正等覺時，頗有少法所證不？」妙生言：「實無有法是佛所證。」佛告妙生：「如是，如是！此中無有少法可得，故名無上正等菩提。」 | 0774c18–c21 |
What the variants turn on:
- The ownership of the question-opening: Kumārajīva alone has 「須菩提白佛言：『佛得菩提，為無所得耶？』」 — Subhūti counter-questions and the Buddha confirms; the other five versions all have the Buddha questioning Subhūti (Bodhiruci 「如來得菩提耶」, Paramārtha 「頗有一法如來所得不」, Dharmagupta 「有法若如來無上正遍知證覺」, Xuanzang 「頗有少法現證無上正等菩提耶」, Yijing 「頗有少法所證不」), Subhūti respectfully answering 「無有（少法）」 and the Buddha then confirming 「如是如是」. Of Kumārajīva's question 「為無所得耶」, Kuiji judges plainly 「耶是問詞，不是不定詞……直問佛云『如來無所得耶』，所以佛即印之」
[0150b03–04]— that is, the Kumārajīva recension makes it a “definite question” (asking whether the Buddha is without attaining), hence the Buddha can confirm; the other versions make it “the Buddha citing the doubt and counter-questioning.” This ownership of the question-opening turns precisely on this division's question-and-answer structure of “cutting the doubt of bodhi's no-attaining” (see register 4). - 「無有少法（可得）／無有一法／微小法無有」: Kumārajīva, Bodhiruci, Xuanzang, Yijing have 「少法」 (Kumārajīva · Bodhiruci 「無有少法」, Xuanzang 「少法無有無得」, Yijing 「無有少法可得」); Paramārtha has 「無有一法」 and adds 「無有如微塵法，如來所捨如來所得」
[0765c05–06]; Dharmagupta has 「微小彼中法無有、不可得」[0770c24]. “The slightest dharma / one dharma / the minutest dharma” all display the sense “in bodhi there is not a hair's-breadth of real dharma that can be attained” — Vasubandhu's treatise 「彼菩提處無有一法可證」T1511 [0793c16], Yijing's treatise 「於此乃至無有少法能過」T1513 [0882b26]. Paramārtha's double marking of 「所捨／所得」 and Dharmagupta's 「不可得」 gloss the same “ultimately no-attaining” as Kumārajīva's 「乃至無有少法可得」 (see register 5). - The Able-to-Cut lineage's joining with “equality”: Paramārtha in the confirming clause goes straight on to 「是故說名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提平等平等」
[0765c06–07], joining division 22 (no-attaining) and division 23 (this dharma is equal) into one breath; Dharmagupta too goes straight on below to 「平等正法，彼不中有不平等」[0770c25–26]. Kumārajīva, Bodhiruci, Xuanzang, Yijing instead set off “this dharma is equal” as a separate passage (division 23) with 「復次」. Vasubandhu's treatise-verse 「彼處無少法，知菩提無上；法界不增減，淨平等自相」T1511 [0793c12–13]precisely runs “no-attaining (division 22)” and “equality (division 23)” through in one verse — no-attaining and equality are originally two faces of one sense (bodhi has no real dharma that can be attained, hence the dharma-realm is equal without high or low), and Paramārtha's and Dharmagupta's joining precisely displays this treatise-source's consistency (see register 4). - The doubling of 「如是，如是」: all six versions' confirmation is 「如是，如是」 (Dharmagupta raising it fourfold 「如是，如是！善實！如是，如是！」), displaying the Buddha's definite confirmation of “no-attaining.”
3 · “Is-Not” and the Three Natures (the eye · dharma-emptiness · breaking the four views · the cognitive hindrance · weighted)
This division's is-not is applied to “bodhi · a dharma” itself: 「我於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提乃至無有少法可得，是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」[0751c22–23] — what is not-attained is the self-of-dharmas (the clinging at bodhi as a really-existent realizable dharma), not the first half's marks · beings (the self-of-persons). This is just §17 second-half's “dharma-emptiness · breaking the four views · the cognitive hindrance” applied to the single dharma of bodhi.
「（佛得）阿耨多羅三藐三菩提 — 乃至無有少法可得 — 是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 mirrors the three natures (the dharma-emptiness position):
- 阿耨多羅三藐三菩提 (X) is the other-dependent — the bodhi manifested and sayably-expressed by the conditioned cultivation of all wholesome dharmas (Kuiji 「要近善知識，聽聞……如法修習，法隨法行，善根滿足故，契證真理，名為成就阿耨菩提」
[0150c12–14]). Bodhi is not non-existent (the sayable other-dependent fruit), hence “is-called.” - 乃至無有少法可得 removes the wholly-imagined — not the “bodhi as a really-existent dharma that can be realized and attained” grasped by discrimination (Kuiji 「真理之中，無如所執少有所得，名為菩提也」
[0150b18–19]; Vasubandhu 「彼菩提處無有一法可證」T1511 [0793c16]). What it removes is precisely the dharma-clinging “bodhi is an attainable real dharma” — this belongs to what is grasped by the cognitive hindrance (the self-of-dharmas), not the first half's self-clinging (the self-of-persons). - 是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提 establishes the perfectly-accomplished — the suchness-bodhi with no real dharma that can be attained (Vasubandhu's verse 「法界不增減，淨平等自相」
T1511 [0793c13]; Kuiji 「是法平等者，謂真如理無增減故」[0150b23–24]). Removing the clinging at a “real attainment” yet keeping the bodhi “manifested by suchness” is precisely the establishing of the perfectly-accomplished.
The division's eye (★ second half · dharma-emptiness): the is-not form, at this division, is applied to “bodhi · a dharma” itself — not the first half's (divisions 1–16) application to the outer objects of “marks · beings · merit” (the self-of-persons · breaking the four marks · the afflictive hindrance), but the second half's (divisions 17–32) application to the subtle clinging at “bodhi as a realizable real dharma” (the self-of-dharmas · breaking the four views · the cognitive hindrance). This is precisely the continued practice of the pivot division 17's “self-emptiness turning to dharma-emptiness · the afflictive hindrance turning to the cognitive hindrance”: division 17 judges 「實無有法發菩提者·無有法名為菩薩」 (breaking the clinging “I-as-bodhisattva”), and this division 22 advances to break the clinging “bodhi is an attainable dharma” — one concrete application of the ancient masters' “the second cycle cuts the cognitive hindrance” (Kuiji following Vasubandhu, division 17 [0127c01–03]). Kuiji (following Asaṅga) marks this division's “right awakening” text outright as “to make beings cut the two hindrances, attain the two bodhis” [0150b10–11], the two bodhis being dharma-body bodhi (anuttara · manifested by cutting the cognitive hindrance) and reward-body bodhi (samyak-saṃbodhi · manifested by cutting the afflictive hindrance) [0150b12–14] — this reading of the “is-not” mirroring the three natures: see Shi Huijing, The Three-Phase “Is-Not” Formula Mapped onto the Yogācāra Three Natures 〔摘自 S5-P01〕; this division is one application of it in the position of “bodhi no-attaining · dharma-emptiness.” The “attainment of no-attaining” (no real dharma can be attained yet suchness-bodhi is plainly so) is just the sūtra-language correspondence of the Thirty Verses' “no-attaining · the transformation of the basis” 〔摘自 S5-P06〕 (see register 7).
4 · Variant Readings of the Ancient Masters (by school · bodhi no-attaining · cutting the fourth doubt · the two hindrances and two bodhis · weighted)
Core · weighted — Vasubandhu's verse in the Vajracchedikā-śāstra (in that place there is no slight dharma · know that bodhi is unsurpassed), preserved in two Chinese versions: Vasubandhu establishes this division as “cutting the fourth doubt (the doubt of bodhi's no-attaining),” the verse 「彼處無少法，知菩提無上」 glossing “there is not even the slightest dharma that can be attained,” pegging each item to the sūtra-text; the two versions differ in name, one in sense. Kuiji, following Vasubandhu and Asaṅga, reads this division's “right awakening” text outright as “cutting the two hindrances, attaining the two bodhis.”
Vasubandhu T1511 (Bodhiruci's rendering): first sets the doubt — 「復有疑，若如來不得一法名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者，云何離於上上證，轉轉得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？自下經文為斷此疑，示現非證法名為得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」[0793c07–10]. The verse [0793c12–15]:
「彼處無少法，知菩提無上；法界不增減，淨平等自相。有無上方便，及離於漏法；是故非淨法，即是清淨法。」
「此明何義？彼菩提處無有一法可證，名為阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。如經『世尊！無有少法如來得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提法』故」[0793c16–18]; 「偈言『法界不增減』，不增減者，是法平等，是故名無上，以更無上上故」[0793c19–20]; 「諸佛如來清淨法身平等無差別，於彼處無有勝者，是故說無上」[0793c22–23]. 〔The verse's latter half 「有無上方便·及離於漏法」 glosses division 23's 「修一切善法·即非善法」 (the without-outflow wholesome dharmas), running through with the single verse of this division's no-attaining bodhi.〕
Vasubandhu T1513 (Yijing's rendering): first sets the difficulty — 「若言如來曾無有法是所覺知者，云何離其後後正知次第而名無上正等覺耶？為答此難，『非是有法可覺方名無上正覺』」[0882b19–22]. The stanza [0882b23–25]:
「少法無有故，無上覺應知，由法界不增，清淨平等性，及方便無上。」
「於此乃至無有少法能過故名無上。又復法界無有增故，其法平等故，名無上上，上性無故。又復如來法身清淨平等故，其法無不齊等、無有少增，故名無上。又復其法是無我自相，此即高，高性無，故名無上」[0882b26–c01].
〔Correspondence of the two versions: 彼處無少法／少法無有故 (知菩提無上／無上覺應知) · 法界不增減·淨平等自相／由法界不增·清淨平等性 — two Chinese renderings of the one Vasubandhu treatise, differing in name, one in sense. Both versions run through, with a single verse / stanza, “no-attaining bodhi (division 22)” and “the dharma-realm equal · without-outflow wholesome dharmas (division 23),” displaying that “no-attaining” and “equality” are originally one sense.〕
Asaṅga T1510 (Dharmagupta's rendering): this division belongs to the seventeenth abode, the Path-of-vision (the abode of the purified mind [0758c03–04]), among the six buddha-ground perfections subsuming the transformation of the basis after the Path-of-vision (purity of the land · purity of supreme vision-and-cognition · the minor marks · the marks-body · speech · mind 國土淨·無上見智淨·隨形好·相身·語·心具足 [0757c28–0758a01]) — the mind perfection · the second, “for the sake of right awakening”: 「於心具足中為念處故……為正覺故，經言『須菩提！於意云何？頗有法如來正覺阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不』如是等」[0758a14–17]. 〔Asaṅga's gloss here does no more than establish the abode-correspondence of the sūtra-text (the six items of the mind perfection: mindfulness-foundation · right awakening · setting forth the dharma of great benefit · taking up the dharma-body · not abiding in saṃsāra or nirvāṇa · purity of conduct-and-abiding [0757c29–0758a02]); its unfolding into “right awakening = the realizer, the realized, contemplation, reality · cutting the two hindrances and attaining the two bodhis” is supplied by Kuiji's citation of Asaṅga, see the Kuiji entry below [0150b07–11].〕
Jizang (Three-Treatise) T1699: sectioned as 「開得說為二章經：前章經明無所說，此章明無所得也」[0121b12–14] (the former chapter = division 21, no-speaking; this chapter = division 22, no-attaining). On the import: 「上明無得菩提，破實得之疑；今明無得，破舉因行階級證果實得疑也」[0121b10–11]. On the text: 「文三：初、佛牒疑情反問善吉，次、善吉奉答明佛無少法得菩提。若有一豪之得則不得道，以畢竟無得爾乃得道耳。以得果實無一法可得，行因實無一行可行，無所得故始得果，無所行故乃是行因也」[0121b14–18]. On the confirmation 「述四義釋無上菩提」[0121b18–19]: 「初即述以無所得故名無上也；二、以體悟法界平等義，故名無上菩提；以無我無人故得菩提者，第三義，彼菩提體無二種我，名無上也……『修一切善法』者……此第四義就因門釋無上」[0121b19–27]. 〔Jizang's “four meanings” run through division 22 (no-attaining · the first meaning) and division 23 (equality · no-self · wholesome dharmas, the second, third, fourth meanings).〕
Zhiyi (Tiantai) T1698: sectioned as 「『佛得菩提』下，第二明習應，有問答前應後習」[0082c01]. On the question-and-answer: 「佛，人也；菩提，道也。佛得道故說以示人，而言無法可說，未審得道不？答中乃至『無有少法可得』，相盡虛通謂之菩提，菩提無相有何可得？寂滅無得，道之至也」[0082c02–05]. On equality (division 23): 「『是法平等』下，結成菩提義也。人無貴賤，法無好醜，平等菩提義也」[0082c05–06].
Kuiji (Yogācāra) T1700: following Vasubandhu's “cutting the fourth doubt, that is, the second doubt of the second turning-resolution” [0150a26–27], the doubt 「若如來不得一法，名無上正等正覺者，云何離於上上證轉轉得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提耶」[0150a28–b01]. On 「為無所得耶」: 「謂耶是問詞，不是不定詞也。直問佛云，如來無所得耶？所以佛即印之……故今問意云，真如理中佛得無上菩提不」[0150b03–06]. Citing Asaṅga's gloss of “right awakening”: 「此是心具足中第二為正覺故，即謂能證、所證、觀照、實相也。故《解深密》云『菩提菩提斷，俱名為菩提』；《大智度》云『說智及智處，俱名為般若』也。謂此為令眾生斷除二障，得二菩提，而有此文，故言為正覺故也」[0150b07–11]; 「文有其五，初、顯示阿耨多羅語，謂無上覺即是法身菩提也；次、已下顯示三藐三菩提，謂正覺即是報身菩提也」[0150b11–14]. On the confirmation: 「此第二印問愜真也。謂真理之中，無如所執少有所得，名為菩提也」[0150b18–19]. On equality (division 23): 「是法平等者，謂真如理無增減故；無有高下者，謂有為法有取捨……無為無勝劣可取捨故，言無高下也」[0150b23–27]; on the dual removal of being-and-emptiness in “no-self etc. · cultivating the good”: 「我、人空故，須遣自妄心；依、圓有故，須存其善法」[0150c17–18].
The three schools of the ancient masters (Three-Treatise · Tiantai · Yogācāra) all converge on Vasubandhu's verse at this division: no-attaining bodhi = in that place there is no slight dharma · know that bodhi is unsurpassed (ultimately not a hair's-breadth of real dharma can be attained, only then is it named bodhi); the reason of its no-attaining = the dharma-realm does not increase or decrease · the pure equal self-mark (the suchness-principle does not increase or decrease, hence there is no high or low that can be attained). Jizang's 「畢竟無得爾乃得道·無所得故始得果」, Zhiyi's 「相盡虛通·寂滅無得，道之至也」, and Kuiji's (following Vasubandhu and Asaṅga) 「真理中無如所執少有所得·為令眾生斷除二障得二菩提」 — each pegs item by item to 「佛得菩提·無有少法可得·是名菩提」. This is the ancient masters' settled reading of this division's “the attainment of no-attaining,” and also the sūtra-source of §17 second-half's “cutting the cognitive hindrance · breaking the dharma-view” (Kuiji reads this division outright as cutting the two hindrances · attaining the two bodhis).
5 · Terminology
阿耨多羅三藐三菩提 anuttara-samyak-saṃbodhi (unsurpassed perfect awakening; Kuiji 「無上覺即是法身菩提，正覺即是報身菩提」[0150b12–14]) ·
無有少法可得 na ... kaścid dharmo ... upalabhyate (ultimately no-attaining; Vasubandhu 「彼菩提處無有一法可證」T1511 [0793c16], Yijing 「於此乃至無有少法能過」T1513 [0882b26]; Kumārajīva · Bodhiruci · Xuanzang · Yijing have 「少法」, Paramārtha 「一法」「無有如微塵法」, Dharmagupta 「微小彼中法無有不可得」) ·
二菩提（法身菩提／報身菩提）dharmakāya-bodhi ／ saṃbhogakāya-bodhi (Kuiji following Asaṅga 「斷除二障，得二菩提」[0150b10–11]) ·
二障 dvividham āvaraṇam (the afflictive hindrance kleśāvaraṇa ／ the cognitive hindrance jñeyāvaraṇa; this division belongs to the second half · what is clung-to is the self-of-dharmas · the hindrance subsumed is the cognitive; Kuiji 「為令眾生斷除二障」[0150b10]) ·
法界不增減 anūnatva-apūrṇatva ／ dharmadhātu (Vasubandhu's verse 「法界不增減，淨平等自相」T1511 [0793c13]; the suchness-principle does not increase or decrease · the equal self-mark) ·
轉轉證（上上證·轉轉得）(Vasubandhu 「云何離於上上證，轉轉得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」T1511 [0793c08–09]; Kuiji 「上上證轉轉得」[0150b01], the realization of the bodhisattva-grounds advancing-in-turn ground by ground) ·
能證／所證（觀照／實相）(Asaṅga 「正覺，即謂能證、所證、觀照、實相」, cited by Kuiji [0150b07–08]). 〔Sanskrit as a pronunciation aid; the rendering-variants of 「少法／一法／微小法」 see register 2.〕
6 · Simile and Rhetoric (the attainment of no-attaining · the reversal of the question-and-answer)
This division has no concrete simile (the empty-space simile is at division 4 · the Sumeru simile at divisions 10, 11, 17 · the patience-ascetic simile at division 14). The point of the rhetoric lies in the definite question-and-answer of “no-attaining” and the reversal of “attaining / no-attaining”:
- The definite question's direct asking and direct confirming: Kumārajīva has 「須菩提白佛言：『佛得菩提，為無所得耶？』」 — a single definite question (Kuiji 「耶是問詞，不是不定詞……直問佛云如來無所得耶」
[0150b03–04]), and the Buddha at once directly confirms 「如是，如是」. The decisiveness of the question (is there nothing attained) and the definiteness of the confirmation (so it is, so it is), without circuitous amplification, only a single question and a single confirmation, displaying outright the verdict of “no-attaining.” The other five versions have “the Buddha citing the doubt and counter-questioning” (Jizang 「佛牒疑情反問善吉，次善吉奉答」[0121b14–15]), likewise a single direct stroke of one question · one answer · one confirmation. - The reversal of “attaining / no-attaining”: it states plainly 「佛得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 (saying to the utmost the loftiness of what is realized), then turns abruptly with 「乃至無有少法可得」 (within what is attained there is not a hair's-breadth of real dharma), and gathers it back into provisional naming with 「是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 (no real attainment yet suchness-bodhi plainly so). The “name” of “attaining” (the sayable other-dependent fruit) set against the “no-attaining” of its substance (no real dharma can be realized) — Zhiyi 「相盡虛通謂之菩提，菩提無相有何可得？寂滅無得，道之至也」
[0082c04–05], Jizang 「無所得故始得果」[0121b17]. - This stroke of “the attainment of no-attaining” (no real dharma can be attained yet bodhi is plainly so) shares one structure of reversal with division 8's “merit is much yet is-not the nature of merit,” division 10's “adornment yet is-not adornment,” and division 18's “fully knowing yet is-not the mind” — all “remove the self-nature (is-not) yet keep the sayable (is-called).” This register shows its rhetoric in this division through the question-and-answer reversal of no-attaining bodhi; the concrete simile is weighted in divisions 4, 14, 26, 32.
7 · Cross-Reading
- Thirty Verses (T1586): the two emptinesses · the transformation of the basis (v.29 「無得不思議，是出世間智」· the perfectly-accomplished) — this division's 「無有少法可得·是名菩提」 is just the sūtra-language correspondence of the Thirty Verses' “no-attaining · the transformation of the basis” (bodhi has no real dharma that can be attained, being the suchness manifested by the transformation of the basis, not a realizable real dharma).
- Cheng weishi lun (T1585): the two hindrances · the two clingings (the self-of-dharmas grasped by the cognitive hindrance) · the two bodhis (great bodhi · great nirvāṇa, attained by cutting the two hindrances) — this division's Kuiji 「斷除二障，得二菩提」
〔see register 4〕is just the sūtra-language correspondence of Cheng weishi lun's “cutting the two hindrances · realizing the two fruits (bodhi · nirvāṇa)”; 「無有少法可得」 is just the removal of the dharma-clinging “bodhi is a real dharma” grasped by the cognitive hindrance. - Madhyānta-vibhāga (T1600): the chapter on suchness · the suchness of the unsurpassed vehicle (no-attaining · the purity of the cognitive hindrance) — the treatise-correspondence of this division's “bodhi no-attaining · cutting the cognitive hindrance” (the second-half dharma-emptiness · subsumed by the cognitive hindrance).
- Twenty Verses (T1590): consciousness-only without object · removing the clung-at real dharma — 「乃至無有少法可得」 is just the removal of the clinging at “bodhi” as a mind-external real dharma, of one lineage with the Twenty Verses' breaking of the real object (dharma-emptiness · removing the wholly-imagined real dharma).
- Heart Sūtra (T251): 「無智亦無得」「以無所得故」 — this division's 「無有少法可得·是名菩提」 is just the Heart Sūtra's dharma-position of “no-attaining” (bodhi has no real dharma that can be attained, only then is it bodhi).
This division's 「無有少法可得·是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 is just the sūtra-language correspondence of the Thirty Verses' · Cheng weishi lun's “no-attaining · the transformation of the basis · cutting the two hindrances and attaining the two bodhis”; 「無有少法可得」 is just the same no-attaining dharma-position as the Heart Sūtra's 「無智亦無得·以無所得故」. Shi Huijing's thesis “what the Diamond Sūtra says in sūtra-language, Cheng weishi lun says in technical language” 〔摘自《從百法到金剛》S5-P10〕: the Diamond Sūtra's phrase 「無有少法可得」 says the same thing that Cheng weishi lun says in the technical language of “cutting the cognitive hindrance · removing the dharma-clinging · the transformation of the basis attaining great bodhi.” The “attainment of no-attaining” is just the transformation-of-the-basis sense of “abide nowhere and give rise to the mind” 〔摘自 S5-P06; the ancient masters see register 4〕. 〔Convention: list only what is genuinely pertinent; no forced pegging — linkage, not padding. The Mahāyāna-saṃgraha has no frontal correspondence at this division and is omitted. Cheng weishi lun is in progress, cited by stable name, to be linked additively when complete.〕
8 · East–West Observation (Western perspective · observation, not adjudication)
- The attainment-of-no-attaining of 「無有少法可得·是名菩提」 ↔ Western negative theology's via negativa (the ultimate cannot be grasped as an object, displayed only by negation — Pseudo-Dionysius, Eckhart's “nothingness”): the West largely argues from the ultimate's non-objectifiability (bodhi cannot be attained as a thing); the ancient-master / Yogācāra reading of “no-attaining” is not merely a negation of the un-expressible but the removal of the dharma-clinging “bodhi is a real dharma” grasped by the cognitive hindrance (Kuiji 「真理中無如所執少有所得名為菩提」
[0150b18–19]), the perfectly-accomplished manifested by cutting the hindrances · the transformation of the basis, not a pure negation — after “no-attaining” there is “is-called” (suchness-bodhi plainly so), hence “the attainment of no-attaining” is not the univocal sense of negative theology. - The definite question of 「為無所得耶」 ↔ Western epistemology's “knowledge as the possession (having) of an object” and its antithesis: the West might read it as “bodhi is not a possessable object of knowledge”; the ancient masters speak of bodhi as “the realizer · the realized · contemplation · reality” (Asaṅga
[0150b07–08]), the merging of realizing-cognition and suchness, not the subject's possession of the object as “attaining” — “in attaining the fruit there is truly not a single dharma that can be attained” (Jizang[0121b16–17]), a realization in which subject-and-object are both extinguished, not the possession of cognition. - The transformation-of-the-basis of “cutting the two hindrances · attaining the two bodhis” ↔ Western philosophy's “transformation / conversion” (Jaspers's “boundary situations,” the radical reorientation of the philosophy of religion): an observation can be drawn; yet Yogācāra's “transformation of the basis” is not merely a reorientation of attitude but the concrete stages of cultivation-and-realization of cutting the two hindrances (the afflictive · the cognitive) · transforming the eight consciousnesses into the four cognitions · attaining the two fruits (bodhi · nirvāṇa) (the ground-by-ground advancing-in-turn 「上上證·轉轉得」
T1511 [0793c08–09]), a fruit of practice with positions · with what is cut · with what is realized, not a vague spiritual transformation. - The point of the observation: the West tends to take “no-attaining · the un-attainable” as theses of negative theology · the un-expressible (how the ultimate cannot be grasped); the ancient masters take “there is not even the slightest dharma that can be attained” as the cultivation-and-realization of cutting the cognitive hindrance · removing the dharma-clinging · the transformation of the basis manifesting suchness-bodhi (what is not-attained is the clinging of the self-of-dharmas, and no-attaining is precisely the perfectly-accomplished manifested by cutting the hindrances). The difference between the negation of negative theology and the cutting-the-hindrances of cultivation-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 [0751c20–c23] (root · No Dharma Can Be Attained). For the [loc] of the no-attaining-bodhi passage in the six versions see register 2: Bodhiruci T0236a [0756a20–a25] · Paramārtha T0237 [0765c02–c07] · Dharmagupta T0238 [0770c20–c25] · Xuanzang T220⑨ [0984c16–c21] · Yijing T0239 [0774c18–c21]. Sectioning / treatise sources: Asaṅga T1510a [0757c28–0758a02·0758a14–a17·0758c03–04] · Vasubandhu T1511 [0793c07–0794a05] · Vasubandhu T1513 [0882b20–0882c09]. Ancient masters: Jizang T1699 [0121b04–0121c02] · Zhiyi T1698 [0082c01–c06] · Kuiji T1700 [0150a25–0150c18].
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 22 · No Dharma Can Be Attained · apparatus · Spring 2026