金剛般若波羅蜜經 分二十四 福智無比分
佛先堆起一座大得不能再大的福：三千大千世界裡所有的須彌山王，拿這許多座山王等量那麼多的七寶，全用來布施。山是十寶山裡最大的，福也堆到了頂。話才說完，佛輕輕一翻——另有人只把這部經的四句偈為人解說，那座山一般大的福，比起持經之福「百分不及一」，再用一切算數去計、一切譬喻去比，都比不上。山愈大，反愈成了襯；福愈多，反愈顯出持經的無比。要緊的是，這不是比哪一邊福多。七寶之福可以稱量，所以再多也有個盡頭；持經之福能持荷菩提，根本不在「可量」這一序裡。古人曾疑：經裡的字句是無記之法，怎能成佛？而佛意正在此——那能表實相的一句經，正是菩提的因。一邊是可以一車一車運走、終究運不出生死的有為之福；一邊是無形無相、卻能載人到彼岸的一法之寶。較量到最後，較出來的不是福的多少，是福與智的不可同日而語。
The Buddha first heaps up a mound of merit as great as great can be: take all the Sumeru mountain-kings in the great-thousandfold world-system, and seven jewels in a measure equal to that many mountain-kings, and give it all away in charity. The mountain is the largest of the ten-jewel mountains, and the merit too is piled to its very peak. No sooner is this said than the Buddha gives it a light turn — there is another who only takes the four-line verse of this sūtra and explains it for others, and that mountain-vast merit, set beside the merit of upholding the sūtra, 「百分不及一」(does not come to one part in a hundred), and reckon it by every count and liken it by every figure, and still it falls short. The greater the mountain, the more it serves only as foil; the more merit is heaped up, the more it sets off how incomparable the upholding of the sūtra is. What matters is that this is not a contest over which side has more merit. The merit of the seven jewels can be weighed and measured, and so however much there is it has an end; the merit of upholding the sūtra can bear up bodhi and simply does not stand in the order of "the measurable" at all. The ancients once doubted: the letters and phrases in the sūtra are a karmically-neutral (無記) dharma — how can they accomplish buddhahood? And the Buddha's intent lies just here — that one line of sūtra which can set forth the real is precisely the cause of bodhi. On the one side is conditioned (有為) merit, that one may cart off load by load yet that can never in the end carry one out of birth-and-death; on the other is the jewel of a single Dharma, formless and markless, yet able to ferry one to the far shore. Weighed to the very end, what is weighed out is not how much merit there is, but that merit and wisdom cannot be spoken of in the same breath.
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 24 · Merit and Wisdom Beyond Compare · essence · Spring 2026
〔一〕須彌山王等量之七寶布施
經曰：
「須菩提！若三千大千世界中所有諸須彌山王，如是等七寶聚，有人持用布施；
「須菩提！假如有人，把三千大千世界裡所有那麼多座須彌山王——拿這許多座山王等量那麼多的七寶聚積起來，全用來布施；
〔二〕持經四句為他人說，前福百分不及一
經曰：
若人以此《般若波羅蜜經》，乃至四句偈等，受持、讀誦、為他人說，於前福德百分不及一，百千萬億分，乃至算數、譬喻所不能及。
另有一人，拿這部《般若波羅蜜經》，哪怕只是其中的四句偈，自己領受奉持、讀誦，又為別人解說——那麼前面那布施的福德，比起這持經的福德來，連它的百分之一都比不上，乃至百千萬億分之一也比不上，再用一切算數去計、用一切譬喻去比，都比不上這持經之福。
[1] Giving Seven Treasures Equal in Measure to All the Sumeru Mountain-Kings
The sūtra says:
「須菩提！若三千大千世界中所有諸須彌山王，如是等七寶聚，有人持用布施；
"Subhūti, suppose someone took, equal in measure to all the Sumeru mountain-kings within the great-thousandfold world-system, a heap of the seven treasures that vast, and gave it all away in charity;
[2] Upholding Four Lines of the Sūtra and Teaching Them — the Former Merit Is Not One Hundredth of This
The sūtra says:
若人以此《般若波羅蜜經》，乃至四句偈等，受持、讀誦、為他人說，於前福德百分不及一，百千萬億分，乃至算數、譬喻所不能及。
and suppose another person took this Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra — even just a four-line verse from it — received and kept it, recited it, and taught it to others: then the merit of that former gift, set against the merit of upholding this sūtra, would not reach one hundredth of it, nor one part in a hundred thousand million; by any reckoning of numbers, by any comparison, it could not come near this merit of upholding the sūtra.
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 24 · Merit and Wisdom Beyond Compare · vernacular · Spring 2026
拿法執、所知障、福德的三性、名身句身文身，來照金剛經這一段「七寶布施不如持經四句」的較量。
本分的眼：不在「即非」，在福德的反顯
讀前面幾分，「即非」一式幾乎句句現身；到這一分，連一個「即非」都沒有。它前一分（善法即非善法）有，後一分（我見即非有我）也有，獨獨這一分沒有。所以照這一分，不能硬拿「即非」去拆一句話——本分的眼在別處：以可量的福，反顯持經之福的無比。
佛舉一個極大的布施：把三千大千世界裡所有的須彌山王，拿這許多座山王等量那麼多的七寶聚起來布施。須彌山是十寶山中最大的，以山王之巨，極言福之至多。可是話鋒陡轉：另有人只持這部經的四句偈為他人說，前面那座山一般大的福德，比起持經之福「百分不及一，乃至算數、譬喻所不能及」。山愈大，反愈成襯；福愈多，反愈顯持經之無比。古德都判這一段是「校量」「格量」之文（吉藏「功德門·重舉格量」、智顗「校量顯勝分」、窺基「四種校量勝」、無著「施設大利法」）。
居後半法空位：所破的，是一層細的法執
這一分在釋慧鏡判的 §17 後半。前半（分一至十六）破的是「我相」，遣的是人我執、煩惱障；後半破的是「法相」，遣的是法我執、所知障。本分為什麼要在這裡重舉一場福德較量？古德點出它所斷的一個疑——這個疑，正是一層細的法執。
前一分剛說「修一切善法，則得菩提」，隨即有人起疑：那受持這部經的「名字句」，豈不是無記法，怎麼能得菩提？薩婆多部判「名字句是無記法」（吉藏「薩婆多等諸部人云名字句是無記法故也」），世親也先設此疑：「以所說法無記法故」。用唯識的眼看，這個疑本身就是一種法執——執著教法的體性（無記），疑它能不能成菩提，這是「於法分別」的細執，正屬所知障所攝。
說「名字句」，唯識另有一套名相：把語言析為名身、句身、文身（單字為文、字成名、名成句），都列在心不相應行法裡，是依色心分位而假立的法，本身不是善、也不是惡，所以薩婆多判它「無記」。本分所疑、所破的「名字句無記」，正落在這三個不相應行假法上。
破無記疑：名句雖無記，而能為菩提因
古德怎麼破這個疑？兩路同歸一處。吉藏說：「名字句雖是無記，能表實相，故受持四句功德無邊」——名句本身雖是無記之符，可是它能表顯實相，所以持經之福無邊。世親說得更透：「雖言無記法，而說是彼因」「此法能為菩提因」——名句雖判為無記，卻正是菩提的因。窺基依世親再補一層：「汝法是無記，我法是善」——你（薩婆多）說的那無記，是就你宗的判法；在般若、在佛這裡，能表實相的名句正是善法，正能為菩提因。
用唯識的話收這一層：名句文身雖是不相應行的假法，可是聞、思、修藉著它而熏成無漏種子、而證菩提——它是了因（顯了菩提之因，非親生菩提之生因），所以「能為菩提因」。前福（七寶）是有漏緣生的福，事相宛然可量（智顗「積寶多而功薄」）；持經之福（名句為了因）能持荷菩提，故為無比。一是可量之福，一是能持菩提之智施，這一場較量，較的正是這兩種福的體性之別。
福德的三性隱讀：遣福之實，立一法寶
本分雖無「即非」的明文，福德的動轉裡卻隱含著三性的實質。順三性看這一場較量：
- 七寶布施之福（依他起）：須彌山王等量的七寶，是緣生的有漏福，事相宛然、確實可量（智顗「明福有實，此即有量」）。布施有福，這一層不否認。
- 百分不及一（遣遍計所執）：所遣的，是「福德有實自性、可恃為菩提之足」這一層妄執。福雖極多，卻不能持荷菩提——把可量的福執為成佛之憑，正是一層遍計。所以說它於持經之福「百分不及一」，不是說它無福，是遣那「福可恃」的實執（這也正是後半所知障當捨的一面：執法可恃）。
- 一法寶勝無量珍寶（立圓成、存世諦）：般若這一法寶，無實自性（不是一個可量的福德），而能持菩提、能為菩提因，所以說它的福無比。世親一語道破：「是故一法寶，勝無量珍寶」。圓成不在別處——就在遣盡了「福可恃」之執處，那能持菩提的法施宛然。
所以「福智無比」四個字，正是這場較量的眼：福施可量，而智施（持經）無比。較量到頭，較出來的不是「哪一邊福多」，是般若一法寶——無自性而能持菩提——之所以無比。
四種勝：窮一切較量而不能喻
世親把這「無比」析為四勝：數勝、力勝、不相似勝、因勝（窺基當人別立「數、計、喻、時」四名）。經文「百分不及一，乃至算數、譬喻所不能及」，正逐一錨著這四勝。用唯識的話略疏：持經所得的勝果，不能用世間的數去校量（數勝）、不能用世間的情計去計度（力勝，窺基「情計勝」）、不能用世間任何事去譬喻（不相似勝，窺基「喻勝」）、也不能用世間有時限的福果去比它那「盡未來際無時分限」的果（因勝，窺基「時勝」）。窮盡世間一切較量之數而不能喻它——「一切世間法，不可得為喻」（世親）——這就是「無比」二字的著落：不是比別的福更多，是根本不在「可量」這一序裡。
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——名句文身、了因、無漏種、轉依之說，自有其經源（解深密、瑜伽）與論本，般若另是一系；而是同一「福不可恃、智施無比」之旨，金剛經以經語（百分不及一·一法寶勝無量珍寶）說，唯識以論語（名句文身·了因·法執所知障·福德無實自性）說，兩相對照，其義益顯。百法立「名身、句身、文身」三不相應行，正是本分所破「名字句無記」之疑的所在；三十頌、成唯識論說無漏種、了因、轉依，與「持經能為菩提因」相應；攝大乘論說「法施·了因顯法身」，與「一法寶能持菩提」相印；二十論說境無實、心所現，與「前福不可恃」之福德反顯相通。般若一系的心經「無智亦無得」，正同此福位——福德無實自性可恃，般若一法寶方為無比。一句收束：金剛經以經語說的「百分不及一」「一法寶勝無量珍寶」，成唯識論以「名句文身·了因·無漏種」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 dharma-clinging, the cognitive hindrance (所知障), the three natures of merit, and the name-body, phrase-body, and syllable-body (名身、句身、文身), to reflect the Diamond Sūtra’s weighing of “giving the seven jewels does not match upholding the four lines of the sūtra.” 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: Not in the “Is-Not,” but in the Setting-Off of Merit
Read the foregoing divisions, and the “is-not” pattern appears almost in every line; by this division, there is not a single “is-not.” The previous division (good dharmas are-not good dharmas) has one, the following division (a self is-not really a self) has one, and this division alone has none. So in reading this division one cannot force an “is-not” to dismantle a line — the eye of this division lies elsewhere: by means of measurable merit, to set off, by contrast, the incomparability of the merit of upholding the sūtra.
The Buddha raises an enormous act of giving: taking all the Sumeru kings of mountains within a great-thousandfold world-system, and heaping up seven jewels equal in measure to that many mountain-kings, to give. Sumeru is the greatest among the ten jeweled mountains; by the vastness of mountain-kings he states to the utmost the abundance of merit. Yet the wording turns abruptly: if another person merely upholds and teaches for others the four-line verse of this sūtra, that mountain-vast merit, compared with the merit of upholding the sūtra, is 「百分不及一，乃至算數、譬喻所不能及」, “not a hundredth part, nor what number or simile can reach.” The greater the mountain, the more it serves as foil; the more abundant the merit, the more it sets off the incomparability of upholding the sūtra. The ancient masters all judge this passage to be a text of “collation” and “weighing” (Jizang: 「功德門·重舉格量」, “the gate of merit · raising again the weighing”; Zhiyi: 「校量顯勝分」, “the division of weighing to disclose superiority”; Kuiji: 「四種校量勝」, “the four kinds of superiority by weighing”; Asaṅga: 「施設大利法」, “setting forth the dharma of great benefit”).
At the Second-Half Station of Dharma-Emptiness: What Is Broken Is a Fine Layer of Dharma-Clinging
This division falls within the second half of §17 as Shi Huijing judges it. The first half (Divisions 1–16) breaks the “mark of self,” removing the person-self-clinging and the affliction-hindrance; the second half breaks the “mark of dharmas,” removing the dharma-self-clinging and the cognitive hindrance. Why must this division raise a weighing of merit again here? The ancient masters point out the doubt it cuts off — and this doubt is precisely a fine layer of dharma-clinging.
The previous division has just said “practice all good dharmas and one attains bodhi,” when someone at once doubts: but the “name and phrase” of upholding this sūtra — is that not an indeterminate (無記) dharma? How could it attain bodhi? The Sarvāstivāda judges that “name and phrase are indeterminate dharmas” (Jizang: 「薩婆多等諸部人云名字句是無記法故也」, “the Sarvāstivāda and other schools say name and phrase are indeterminate dharmas”), and Vasubandhu too first poses this doubt: 「以所說法無記法故」, “because the Dharma spoken of is an indeterminate dharma.” Seen with the Yogācāra eye, this doubt is itself a kind of dharma-clinging — clinging to the very substance of the teaching (as indeterminate) and doubting whether it can accomplish bodhi; this is the fine clinging of “discriminating upon dharmas,” belonging just to the cognitive hindrance.
Speaking of “name and phrase,” Yogācāra has its own set of terms: language is analyzed into name-body, phrase-body, and syllable-body (名身、句身、文身; the single syllable is the syllable, syllables forming a name, names forming a phrase), all listed among the dharmas-not-concomitant-with-mind (心不相應行法), provisionally established upon positions of form and mind, in themselves neither good nor evil, hence the Sarvāstivāda judges them “indeterminate.” The “name and phrase as indeterminate” doubted and broken in this division falls precisely upon these three provisional not-concomitant dharmas.
Breaking the Indeterminacy Doubt: Though Name and Phrase Are Indeterminate, They Can Be a Cause for Bodhi
How do the ancient masters break this doubt? Two paths come home to one place. Jizang says: 「名字句雖是無記，能表實相，故受持四句功德無邊」— “though name and phrase are indeterminate, they can express the real mark, and so the merit of upholding the four lines is boundless.” Name and phrase, though indeterminate marks in themselves, can express and disclose the real mark, so the merit of upholding the sūtra is boundless. Vasubandhu says it more penetratingly: 「雖言無記法，而說是彼因」「此法能為菩提因」— “though called an indeterminate dharma, it is said to be the cause of that”; “this dharma can be a cause for bodhi.” Name and phrase, though judged indeterminate, are precisely the cause of bodhi. Kuiji, following Vasubandhu, adds a further layer: 「汝法是無記，我法是善」— “your dharma is indeterminate, my dharma is good”: the indeterminacy you (the Sarvāstivāda) speak of is by your school’s mode of judgment; in prajñā, in the Buddha here, the name and phrase that can express the real mark are precisely good dharmas, precisely able to be a cause for bodhi.
To gather this layer in Yogācāra’s words: though the name-body, phrase-body, and syllable-body are provisional not-concomitant dharmas, hearing, reflecting, and cultivating perfume uncontaminated seeds and corroborate bodhi by means of them — they are the disclosing-cause (了因, the cause that discloses bodhi, not the productive-cause that directly begets bodhi), and so they “can be a cause for bodhi.” The former merit (the seven jewels) is conditionally-arisen contaminated merit, its phenomenal mark vividly measurable (Zhiyi: 「積寶多而功薄」, “the jewels heaped up are many, but the merit is thin”); the merit of upholding the sūtra (name and phrase as disclosing-cause) can bear and sustain bodhi, hence beyond compare. The one is measurable merit, the other a wisdom-giving able to sustain bodhi — and what this weighing weighs is just this difference in the very substance of these two merits.
The Hidden Three-Nature Reading of Merit: Removing Merit’s Reality, Establishing a Single Dharma-Jewel
Though this division has no express “is-not,” the turning of merit conceals the substance of the three natures. Read the weighing through the three natures:
- The merit of giving the seven jewels (dependent-arising) (依他起): seven jewels equal in measure to the Sumeru kings of mountains are conditionally-arisen contaminated merit, its phenomenal mark vivid and truly measurable (Zhiyi: 「明福有實，此即有量」, “clarifying that the merit has reality — and this is the measurable”). Giving has merit; this layer is not denied.
- Not a hundredth part (removing the wholly-imagined) (遣遍計所執): what is removed is the layer of false clinging to “merit having a real own-nature, to be relied on as a sufficiency for bodhi.” Merit, though most abundant, cannot bear and sustain bodhi — to grasp measurable merit as a warrant for Buddhahood is just a layer of the wholly-imagined. So it is said to be, against the merit of upholding the sūtra, “not a hundredth part” — not that it has no merit, but the removal of the real clinging that “merit can be relied on” (this too is the side of the cognitive hindrance to be relinquished in the second half: clinging that dharmas can be relied on).
- The single Dharma-jewel surpasses measureless precious jewels (establishing the perfectly-accomplished, preserving the conventional) (立圓成、存世諦): this Dharma-jewel of prajñā has no real own-nature (it is not a measurable merit), yet it can sustain bodhi and be a cause for bodhi, and so its merit is beyond compare. Vasubandhu catches it in a phrase: 「是故一法寶，勝無量珍寶」, “therefore the single Dharma-jewel surpasses measureless precious jewels.” The perfectly-accomplished is nowhere else — right where the clinging that “merit can be relied on” is removed, the Dharma-giving able to sustain bodhi is vividly there.
So the four words “merit and wisdom beyond compare” are the very eye of this weighing: merit-giving is measurable, while wisdom-giving (upholding the sūtra) is beyond compare. Weighed to the end, what is weighed out is not “which side has more merit,” but why the single Dharma-jewel of prajñā — without own-nature yet able to sustain bodhi — is beyond compare.
The Four Superiorities: Exhausting Every Weighing, It Cannot Be Likened
Vasubandhu analyzes this “beyond compare” into four superiorities: superiority of number, superiority of power, superiority of dissimilarity, and superiority of cause (Kuiji, ranking them person by person, sets up the four names “number, reckoning, simile, time”). The text 「百分不及一，乃至算數、譬喻所不能及」, “not a hundredth part, nor what number or simile can reach,” anchors these four superiorities one by one. To gloss briefly in Yogācāra’s words: the superior fruit attained by upholding the sūtra cannot be weighed by worldly number (superiority of number), cannot be reckoned by worldly calculation (superiority of power, Kuiji’s “superiority of reckoning”), cannot be likened by anything worldly (superiority of dissimilarity, Kuiji’s “superiority of simile”), and cannot be compared by any time-bound worldly merit-fruit to its fruit that is “to the end of future time, without bound of time-division” (superiority of cause, Kuiji’s “superiority of time”). It exhausts every weighing-number of the world and cannot be likened — 「一切世間法，不可得為喻」 (Vasubandhu), “all worldly dharmas cannot serve as a simile for it” — and this is the seat of the two words “beyond compare”: not that it is more merit than other merit, but that it simply does not stand within the order of “the measurable” at all.
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 Yogācāra flowed out of the Diamond Sūtra — the teachings of the name-body, phrase-body, and syllable-body, the disclosing-cause, the uncontaminated seed, and the transformation of the basis have their own scriptural sources (the Saṃdhinirmocana, the Yogācārabhūmi) and treatises, the Prajñā corpus being another lineage. Rather, the same import — “merit cannot be relied on, wisdom-giving is beyond compare” — is stated by the Diamond Sūtra in sūtra-language (not a hundredth part · the single Dharma-jewel surpasses measureless precious jewels) and by Yogācāra in treatise-language (name-body, phrase-body, syllable-body · the disclosing-cause · dharma-clinging the cognitive hindrance · merit without real own-nature); set side by side, the meaning shows the more clearly. The Hundred Dharmas establish the three not-concomitant dharmas “name-body, phrase-body, syllable-body” — precisely the seat of this division’s broken doubt of “name and phrase as indeterminate.” The Thirty Verses and the Cheng weishi lun speak of the uncontaminated seed, the disclosing-cause, and the transformation of the basis, answering to “upholding the sūtra can be a cause for bodhi.” The Mahāyāna-saṃgraha speaks of “the giving of Dharma · the disclosing-cause discloses the Dharma-body,” which seals with “the single Dharma-jewel can sustain bodhi.” The Twenty Verses speak of the object being unreal and manifested by mind, according with the setting-off of merit in “the former merit cannot be relied on.” Within the Prajñā lineage, the Heart Sūtra’s “no wisdom and also no attainment” shares the same position of merit as this division — merit has no real own-nature to be relied on, and only the single Dharma-jewel of prajñā is beyond compare. To seal it in one line: what the Diamond Sūtra states in sūtra-language as “not a hundredth part” and “the single Dharma-jewel surpasses measureless precious jewels,” and what the Cheng weishi lun states in the technical language of “name-body, phrase-body, syllable-body · the disclosing-cause · the uncontaminated seed,” 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 24 · Merit and Wisdom Beyond Compare · exposition · Spring 2026
考據Apparatus
一、科判定位（福德較量 · §17 後半 · 加「較量結構」小目）
| 科判系統 | 此分之位 |
|---|---|
| 昭明 32分 | 分二十四 福智無比分 |
| 釋慧鏡 §17 二分 | 後半（法空·破四見·所知障；福德較量四分之第四，以七寶之巨反顯持經之無比） |
| 道安 三分 | 正宗分 · 第二周 · 校量持經功德 |
| 無著十八住 T1510 | 第十七住 證道（淨心住處 [0758c03–04]）中，佛地六具足之「心具足」攝轉依，其念處後第三「施設大利法」——「為施設大利法故，經言『復次，須菩提！三千大千世界中，所有須彌山』」[0758a18–19]；卷下覆釋「於彼心具足中，為施設大利法故，經言『三千大千世界中，所有須彌』」[0765a10–11]（持經四句即大利法，七寶較量顯其利） |
| 世親 二十七疑 T1511/T1513 | 「所說法無記·不能得菩提」之疑——「若一切善法滿足得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者，則所說法不能得大菩提。何以故？以所說法無記法故」（T1511 [0794a13–15]／T1513 [0882c13] 標「說法雖無記，非不得應知」），答以「重說勝福譬喻」 |
| 吉藏（三論）T1699 | 「上來明般若體門及信受門竟，今說經是功德門也」[0121c05]；依論生起，破薩婆多「名字句是無記法」之疑而重舉格量（三千七寶較量持經）[0121c06–c10] |
| 智顗（天台）T1698 | 依天親十二分，屬第七「校量顯勝分」[0076a22]；其校量總義「積寶多而功薄，四句約而福厚」[0078b18–19]、「以無福為福，故多……心之無性，惑滅解生」[0082b17–20]（智顗疏簡，未別出諸須彌山王段，總攝於校量顯勝） |
| 窺基（唯識）T1700 | 施設大利法（依世親「破第二子段疑」[0150c29]，即無記疑）；「論家有四種校量勝：一者、數勝，二者、力勝，三者、無相似勝，四者、因勝」[0151a19–23]；當人別立「數、計、喻、時」四名 [0151b03] |
較量結構：本分立「諸須彌山王七寶聚／持四句偈」之對較——正面舉布施福德之巨（三千大千所有須彌山王等量七寶，視前諸較量分之「三千七寶」（分八）、「恆沙七寶」（分十一）為更巨），陡然以「受持四句偈為他人說，前福於此百分不及一」翻轉，以福之至多反顯持經之無比。古德四家俱判此為「校量／格量」之文（吉藏「功德門·重舉格量」、智顗「校量顯勝分」、窺基「四種校量勝」、無著「施設大利法」）。其反顯之理，世親一語道破：所說法（名句文）雖薩婆多判為無記，然「能為菩提因」，「一法寶勝無量珍寶」（T1511 [0794a16–21]）；福勝有四（數·力·不相似·因），「一切世間法不可得為喻」（T1511 [0794a28–b11]）。「福智無比」者，福施可量而智施（持經）無比——此分之眼，由「福德之較量」顯「般若一法寶之無比」。本分無「即非」三句式（即非在前分「善法即非善法」、後分「我見即非有我」），目三就後半法空·福德反顯立說。
二、異譯對勘（六漢譯 · 須彌山王七寶較量一段）
要句：諸須彌山王等七寶聚布施 / 受持四句偈為他人說 / 前福於此百分不及一 / 乃至算數譬喻所不能及（古德傳梵微數名）
| 版本 | 須彌山王七寶較量一段（逐字節錄） | [出處] |
|---|---|---|
| 羅什 T235（原典） | 「須菩提！若三千大千世界中所有諸須彌山王，如是等七寶聚，有人持用布施；若人以此《般若波羅蜜經》，乃至四句偈等，受持、讀誦、為他人說，於前福德百分不及一，百千萬億分，乃至算數、譬喻所不能及。」 | 0751c29–0752a04 |
| 菩提流支 T236 | 「須菩提！三千大千世界中，所有諸須彌山王，如是等七寶聚，有人持用布施，若人以此般若波羅蜜經，乃至四句偈等，受持讀誦，為他人說，於前福德，百分不及一，千分不及一，百千萬分不及一，歌羅分不及一，數分不及一，優波尼沙陀分不及一，乃至算數譬喻所不能及。」 | 0756b01–b07 |
| 真諦 T237 | 「須菩提！三千大千世界，所有諸須彌山王，如是等七寶聚，滿此世界，有人持用布施。若人從此般若波羅蜜經，乃至四句偈等，受持讀誦為他正說，所得功德，以前功德比此功德，百分不及一，千萬億分不及一，窮於算數不及其一，乃至威力品類相應譬喻所不能及。」 | 0765c15–c21 |
| 達摩笈多 T238 | 「若復，善實！所有三千大千世界須彌山王，彼所有聚七寶，普散如來、應、等正遍知施與。若此智慧彼岸到，乃至四句等偈，受已，為他等分別，此，善實！福聚，彼前者福聚，百上亦數不及，千上亦，百千上亦，俱致百千上亦，俱致那由他百千上亦，僧企耶亦，迦羅亦，算亦，譬喻亦，憂波泥奢亦，乃至譬喻亦不及。」 | 0771a01–a07 |
| 玄奘 T220⑨ | 「復次，善現！若善男子或善女人，集七寶聚量等三千大千世界其中所有妙高山王，持用布施。若善男子或善女人，於此般若波羅蜜多經中乃至四句伽他，受持、讀誦、究竟通利，及廣為他宣說、開示、如理作意。善現！前說福聚於此福聚，百分計之所不能及，如是千分、若百千分、若俱胝百千分、若俱胝那庾多百千分、若數分、若計分、若算分、若喻分、若鄔波尼殺曇分亦不能及。」 | 0984c28–0985a05 |
| 義淨 T239 | 「妙生！若三千大千世界中，所有諸妙高山王，如是等七寶聚，有人持用布施。若復有人，於此經中，乃至一四句頌，若自受持，及為他說。以前福聚比此福聚，假令分此以為百分，彼亦不能及一分，或千分億分算分、勢分、數分、因分，乃至譬喻亦不能及一。」 | 0774c26–0775a02 |
異文所繫：
- 「須彌山王／妙高山王」：羅什、流支、真諦、笈多作「須彌山王」（音義並存），玄奘、義淨作「妙高山王」（義譯；sumeru「妙高」）。施物之喻由「三千七寶」（分八）、「恆沙七寶」（分十一）漸增至「須彌山王等量之七寶聚」——以山王之巨極言福之多，正為下文「百分不及一」之反顯張本（無著「施設大利法」
[0758a18–19]，玄奘獨明標「集七寶聚量等三千大千世界其中所有妙高山王」[0984c28–29]，量詞最詳）。 - 微數名之古德傳梵（最硬之徵引資料）：諸譯於「百分不及一」後所列微數名，正是世親四勝偈之文本指紋——
- 羅什：止「百分不及一，百千萬億分，乃至算數、譬喻」
[0752a03–04]（略本，世親論逕言「此經稍略，餘本不同此也」，見窺基[0151a12]）。 - 流支：「百分·千分·百千萬分·歌羅分·數分·優波尼沙陀分」
[0756b04–06]（六名最備）。 - 笈多：「百上·千上·百千上·俱致百千上·俱致那由他百千上·僧企耶（saṃkhyā 數）·迦羅（kalā）·算·譬喻·憂波泥奢（upaniṣad）」
[0771a04–07]。 - 玄奘：「百分·千分·百千分·俱胝百千分·俱胝那庾多百千分·數分·計分·算分·喻分·鄔波尼殺曇分」
[0985a02–05]。 - 義淨：「百分·千分·億分·算分·勢分·數分·因分」
[0775a01–02]。 「歌羅（kalā）／迦羅」「優波尼沙陀（upaniṣad）／憂波泥奢／鄔波尼殺曇」二微數名，正繫於世親四勝之「力勝（歌羅分）」「因勝（優波尼沙陀分）」（見目四、目五）。
- 羅什：止「百分不及一，百千萬億分，乃至算數、譬喻」
- 真諦「威力品類相應譬喻」之獨譯：真諦不列微數名，逕作「窮於算數不及其一，乃至威力品類相應譬喻所不能及」
[0765c19–21]——「威力（力勝）·品類（不相似勝）」二語即以義譯收攝四勝之「力·不相似」，與流支、玄奘之逐名列舉互為顯隱。 - 「受持讀誦／為他人說」：羅什「受持、讀誦、為他人說」
[0752a02–03]；玄奘獨備「受持、讀誦、究竟通利，及廣為他宣說、開示、如理作意」[0985a01–02]（自受持與為他說之能斷系廣詞，逐字錄之不縮）；義淨「若自受持，及為他說」[0775a01]——自利（受持）與利他（為他說）二行，即世親「二能持菩提」之文證（見目四）。
三、即非・三性（眼 · 後半 · 法空位之福德反顯）
本分無「即非」三句式。即非在前分（分二十三「所言善法者，如來說非善法，是名善法」[0751c27–28]）與後分（分二十五「如來說有我者，則非有我」[0752a09–10]、「凡夫者，如來說非凡夫」）；本分之眼不在「即非」一式，而在法空·後半位之福德較量——以可量之福反顯法施（般若）之無比，即「遣福德實自性而存其可說之多」，三性之動轉仍隱攝於福之較量。
後半 法空·破四見·所知障之框（§17 樞紐之後）：本分居 §17 後半（分十七–卅二），所對治者非前半之我相·煩惱障，乃法執·所知障。其所斷之疑——「所說法（名句文）是無記法，云何能得菩提」（薩婆多部執名句文身為無記·不相應行；吉藏 [0121c08–09]、世親 T1511 [0794a14–15]）——正是法執之一：執「教法之體性（無記）」而疑其能否成菩提，是「於法分別」之細執。世親答以「此法能為菩提因」T1511 [0794a21]、「一法寶勝無量珍寶」[0794a18]——遣「法施無用」之損減見（法空非斷滅，無記之名句正是菩提因），亦遣「七寶福德有實自性可恃」之增益見（福可量故非無比）。前半「四相」之我空，至此後半已轉為「於法（福德·教法）之實執」之破——福德無實自性（不可恃為菩提之足），般若一法寶（無自性而能持菩提）方為無比。
福德之三性讀（隱攝）：
- 七寶布施之福德（依他起）——須彌山王等量之七寶緣生有漏福，事相宛然可量（智顗「積寶多而功薄」
[0078b19]；「明福有實，此即有量」[0082b17–18]）。 - 百分不及一·算數譬喻所不能及（遣遍計）——遣「福德有實自性、可恃為菩提之足」之執；福雖多而「不能持荷菩提」，故於持經之福為不可喻（世親「福不持菩提」之理，見目四
T1513 [0877a19–20]，本分以「四勝」顯之）。 - 一法寶勝無量珍寶（立圓成·世諦可說）——般若一法寶無實自性（即非可量之福德），而能持菩提、能為菩提因，故說其福無比（世親「一法寶勝無量珍寶」
T1511 [0794a18]、「由斯一法寶，勝彼寶無量」T1513 [0882c16]）。
此福德反顯之讀，與釋慧鏡《即非三段式映射唯識三性》〔摘自 S5-P01〕之三性動轉同理；本分為其於法空·福德較量位之一施（無「即非」之顯文，而有「遣福實·立法寶」之三性實質）。承 §17 樞紐「二問再現·我空轉法空·煩惱障轉所知障」〔摘自《金剛經的自我重演》S5-P07〕：福德較量於前半（分八）破「福德實有」之我相所攝，於後半（本分）則破「於法（教法無記·福德可恃）之細執」，是「第二周斷所知障」之福德一施。
四、諸家異釋（古德 · 無記疑·四種勝·一法寶 · 加重）
核心 加重 ——世親《金剛般若論》二偈（無記·一法寶／數力無似勝·四勝），二漢譯並存： 世親以「雖言無記法，而說是彼因」釋「所說法能得菩提」（破無記疑），以「數力無似勝，無似因亦然」釋四勝（前福不及持經之四義），逐項錨於漢譯之微數名；二譯名異義一。
世親 T1511（菩提流支譯）——先設疑：「復有疑，若一切善法滿足得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者，則所說法不能得大菩提。何以故？以所說法無記法故。為斷此疑，重說勝福譬喻」[0794a13–16]。論偈一 [0794a16–17]：
「雖言無記法，而說是彼因；是故一法寶，勝無量珍寶。」
「雖言所說法是無記，而能得大菩提……此法能為菩提因。又言無記者，此義不然。何以故？汝法是無記，而我法是記」[0794a19–22]；「是故此所說法，勝彼阿僧祇須彌等珍寶故」[0794a23–24]。論偈二（四勝）[0794a28–29]：
「數力無似勝，無似因亦然；一切世間法，不可得為喻。」
「示於前福德此福為勝。云何為勝？一者數勝；二者力勝；三者不相似勝；四者因勝」[0794b01–03]；逐項錨於漢譯微數名：「數勝者，如經『百分不及一，乃至算數譬喻所不能及』故」[0794b04–05]；「力勝者，如經『不及一歌羅分』故」[0794b05–06]；「無似勝者，此福德中數不相似，以此福德不可數故。如經『數不能及』故」[0794b06–08]；「因勝者，因果不相似，以此因果勝彼因果故。如經『乃至優波尼沙陀分不及一』故」[0794b08–10]。
世親 T1513（義淨譯）——「說法雖無記，非不得應知」[0882c13]；「由非離此能得菩提，故知藉斯菩提方契」[0882c14–15]。論頌（一法寶）[0882c16]：
「由斯一法寶，勝彼寶無量。」
「故此宣說法寶，望前無數妙高無邊之寶，顯福差別」[0882c17–18]。論頌（算勢類·四差別）[0882c20–21]：
「於諸算勢類，因亦有差殊，尋思於世間，喻所不能及。」
「謂以此福望前福聚，謂是算勢類。因四種差別，於此世間遍尋思已，無有其喻能比況者」[0882c22–24]；逐項釋四名：「言由算差別者，始從假為第百分，乃至或為算分不顯差殊」[0882c24–26]；「或為勢分者，由其勢力有差殊故，如強弱人事不相並」[0882c26–27]；「或為比數者，由品類別，言此福類元不比數前之福類，如貴賤人不相比數」[0882c27–29]；「因者明其因，果亦不相干涉故，言彼亦不可與此為因」[0882c29–0883a01]。
〔二譯對位：無記·而說是彼因／說法雖無記·非不得 · 一法寶勝無量珍寶／一法寶勝彼寶無量 · 數力無似勝四勝（數·力·不相似·因）／算勢類四差別（算·勢·數〔比數〕·因）——同一世親論之二漢譯，名異義一。流支「歌羅分（力）·優波尼沙陀分（因）」與義淨「勢分（力）·因分（因）」即同一四勝之逐名顯隱。〕
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中之「心具足」，其念處·正覺後第三「施設大利法」——「為施設大利法故，經言『復次，須菩提！三千大千世界中，所有須彌山』」[0758a18–19]；卷下覆釋「於彼心具足中，為施設大利法故，經言『三千大千世界中，所有須彌』」[0765a10–11]。〔無著釋此段極簡，止安立經文之住處對位（持經四句即「大利法」，七寶較量顯其利）；其四勝之展開，由世親論偈足之（見上），窺基、吉藏俱依世親四勝釋之。〕
吉藏（三論）T1699：科為「功德門」[0121c05]（般若體門·信受門後之功德門）。釋重舉格量之由（破無記疑）：「依論生起，從上修一切善法得菩提文生。若言修善法得菩提者，受持此經章句不得菩提。何以故？薩婆多等諸部人云名字句是無記法故也。為破此疑，故重舉也，明名字句雖是無記，能表實相，故受持四句功德無邊」[0121c06–c10]；「又汝法中言是無記，我法中明此是般若名字句，豈是無記」[0121c11–c13]。依論四勝（逐錨微數名）：「依論，經有四種勝：一者云百分不及一乃至百千分不及一，此是數勝，持經福不可數也。二者、歌羅分不及一，此是力用勝，明經力用勝七寶施力用；三者、優婆尼沙陀分不及一，此云不相似數勝，此是數中微細之數，乃至持經少許福德數，無有與此數相似，故云數勝。四者、因果勝，此經因果勝餘因果也」[0121c17–c24]。
智顗（天台）T1698：依天親十二分，本分屬第七「校量顯勝分」[0076a22]。其校量總義（疏簡，未別出諸須彌山王段）：「積寶多而功薄，四句約而福厚……七寶是事善、緣因，天人果報不動不出，故以動出之慧導之得成菩提，一念圓信能導眾善，此心為勝」[0078b18–24]；「明福有實，此即有量，豈得多耶？以無福為福，故多也……福德無實則可曠施而多。心之無性，惑滅解生也」[0082b17–20]。〔智顗總攝諸福德較量於「校量顯勝」一分，以「積約而福厚·無福為福」一義貫之，不逐分別釋；故本分（諸須彌山王七寶）之釋見其總義。〕
窺基（唯識）T1700：科為施設大利法（依世親「破第二子段疑」即無記疑 [0150c29]；「其能詮教有名、句、文，體是無記，如何聽聞而生善耶？此是小乘人疑也」[0151a03–05]）；「無著云，此即心具足中第三為施設大利法故」[0151a06–07]。釋無記疑：「世親云，此法雖言無記而能得菩提，以遠離所說法，不能得大菩提故，此法能為菩提因故；又言無記者，不然！汝法是無記，我法是善故，此就彼宗釋，佛語是善也」[0151a13–18]。釋四勝（四種校量勝）：「『百分不及一』等者，論家有四種校量勝，謂一者、數勝，二者、力勝，三者、無相似勝，四者、因勝」[0151a19–23]；「數勝者，謂以數校量……若受持此經，當得成佛所有功德，非此數等之所校量，故云數勝也」[0151a23–a26]；「力勝者，名為情計勝，謂布施等所獲世間人天善果情計可知，今此受、持之因，情計所不計度也」[0151a26–a28]；「不相似勝者，謂喻勝也……受、持之因所得勝果，無喻以可喻也」[0151a28–b01]；「因勝者，謂時勝，世間福果可以時限校量多少，此所得果，盡未來際無時分限，不可校量也。如論四名，當人立數、計、喻、時等名也」[0151b01–b03]。
古德三家異流（三論·天台·唯識）於本分同歸世親二偈：所說法雖無記而能得菩提＝一法寶勝無量珍寶（吉藏「名字句雖無記能表實相」、窺基「我法是善·此法能為菩提因」）；前福不及持經有四勝＝數·力·不相似·因（吉藏「數·力用·不相似·因果」逐錨歌羅分·優婆尼沙陀分；窺基「數·力·無相似·因」別立「數、計、喻、時」四名；智顗總攝「積約福厚·無福為福」）。較量之眼，由「七寶之巨（須彌山王）」反顯「般若一法寶之無比」——此即本分「福智無比」之古德定讀。
五、術語
須彌山王／妙高山王 sumeru-parvata-rāja（須彌＝妙高；吉藏「須彌，此云妙高山，亦云安明山」[0112a09]；智顗「須彌，翻云安明」[0079a07]；玄奘、義淨作「妙高山王」）·
七寶聚 sapta-ratna-rāśi（須彌山王等量之七寶積聚；無著判此為「施設大利法」之較量喻 [0758a18–19]）·
歌羅分／迦羅 kalā（微數名之一；世親判為「力勝」所錨——「力勝者，如經『不及一歌羅分』故」T1511 [0794b05–06]；吉藏「歌羅分不及一，此是力用勝」[0121c20–21]）·
優波尼沙陀分／憂波泥奢／鄔波尼殺曇 upaniṣad（微數名之一·極微之數；世親判為「因勝」所錨——「因勝者……如經『乃至優波尼沙陀分不及一』故」T1511 [0794b08–10]；吉藏「優婆尼沙陀分不及一，此云不相似數勝……數中微細之數」[0121c21–23]）·
僧企耶 saṃkhyā（數；笈多獨存此名 [0771a06]）·
四種校量勝（數勝·力勝·不相似勝〔無相似勝〕·因勝；世親 T1511 [0794b01–03]；窺基別立「數、計、喻、時」[0151b03]；義淨譯作「算·勢·〔比〕數·因」四差別 T1513 [0882c24–0883a01]）·
無記（法） avyākṛta（薩婆多執名句文身為無記·不相應行；吉藏「薩婆多等諸部人云名字句是無記法」[0121c08–09]；世親「所說法無記法故」T1511 [0794a14–15]，窺基「能詮教有名、句、文，體是無記」[0151a02–03]）·
一法寶（般若名字句·能持菩提之法施）eka-dharma-ratna（世親「是故一法寶，勝無量珍寶」T1511 [0794a18]／「由斯一法寶，勝彼寶無量」T1513 [0882c16]）。〔梵文發音輔助；微數名「歌羅·優波尼沙陀·僧企耶」之譯異見目二。〕
六、譬喻・修辭（較量結構 · 須彌山王反顯 · 微數階降）
本分無具象身喻（虛空喻在分四·忍辱仙人喻在分十四·法身大身須彌喻在分十·十七）。修辭之要在較量之翻轉與微數之階降：
- 須彌山王之鋪張：施物由前較量分之「三千七寶」（分八）、「恆沙七寶」（分十一）漸增，至此極於「三千大千所有諸須彌山王等量之七寶聚」——以山王之巨（十寶山中最大，吉藏「須彌於十寶山中最大」
[0112a08]）極言福之至多，正當福多之頂。 - 較量之翻轉：陡轉為「受持四句偈為他人說，於前福德百分不及一」——以山王之巨（可量之至多）反顯持經之無比（不可量之勝），山王之巨愈極，持經之無比愈顯。世親判此福「望前無數妙高無邊之寶，顯福差別」
T1513 [0882c17–18]；智顗「積寶多而功薄，四句約而福厚」[0078b18–19]——巨者反成襯，無比反成勝。 - 微數之階降：「百分·千分·百千萬億分·〔歌羅分·數分·優波尼沙陀分〕·乃至算數、譬喻所不能及」——以微數名（kalā 歌羅·upaniṣad 優波尼沙陀，數中之極微）層層階降，極言前福於持經之福「不及其一」之至微。世親以此微數階降配四勝（數·力·不相似·因），「一切世間法，不可得為喻」
T1511 [0794a29]——窮世間一切較量之數（算·勢·比·因）而不能喻，是「無比」之修辭極致。
此「巨者反顯·微數階降」之筆，與分八「福多而即非福德性」、分十一「恆沙七寶不如持經」同一較量翻轉之構，而以「須彌山王」之巨、微數名之極微，較諸前分為尤甚。此「較量結構」於福德較量四分（八·十一·十五·廿四）反復回環，本分（須彌山王·四勝微數）為其極。具象譬喻則於分四·十四·廿六·卅二加重。
七、互讀
- 百法（T1614）：心不相應行法（名身·句身·文身）——本分所破「名句文（名字句）是無記」之疑，正涉百法「名身·句身·文身」三不相應行之體性判（薩婆多執其無記，般若明其能表實相·為菩提因）。
- 三十頌（T1586）：二空·轉依（v.29 圓成實）·無漏種——本分「持經（般若一法寶）能持菩提·為菩提因」即無漏因·轉依所依之經語對應。
- 二十論（T1590）：唯識無境·福德與心——前福（七寶布施）為有漏緣生之福，「不可恃為菩提之足」即唯識「境無實·心所現」之福德反顯。
- 辯中邊論（T1600）：辯真實品·世俗勝義——「所說法雖無記（世俗名句）而能得菩提（勝義所詮）」即辯中邊世俗·勝義二諦相即之論本對應。
- 攝大乘論（T1594）：彼果智分·法身·了因——本分「持經一法寶勝無量珍寶·能持菩提」即攝論「法施·了因顯法身」之論本（參分八「了因／生因」之對應）。
- 成唯識論（T1585）：無記·無漏種·了因生因——本分「名句文無記·而能為菩提因」即成唯識「名句文身（不相應行假法）·無漏種·了因」之技術語對應。
- 心經（T251）：「無智亦無得」——本分「福德百分不及一·算數譬喻所不能及」即「無得」之福位（福德無實自性可恃，般若一法寶方無比）。
本分「所說法無記而能得菩提·一法寶勝無量珍寶·四種校量勝」，即百法「名句文身」、三十頌·成唯識論「無漏種·了因·轉依」之經語對應；「百分不及一」即心經「無得」之福位。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「一法寶勝無量珍寶」一語，世親論以「無記名句·能為菩提因·了因」之技術語說同一事。〔約定：只列實相關者，不强挂——系聯，非湊數。古德引據見目四，互讀唯系聯不引古德逐字。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）
- 「百分不及一·算數譬喻所不能及」之福德不可通約 ↔ 西方價值論之「價值不可通約（incommensurability；拉茲 J. Raz）」、量與質之別（七寶之量對持經之質）：西方多讀為「二善之不可通約·無共同尺度」之價值階序；古德／唯識讀為福之體性轉——前福（七寶）非劣於持經之「量上不足」，乃「不能持荷菩提」之質別（世親「福不持菩提，彼二能持」
T1513 [0877a19–20]，本分以「四勝」顯之），是體性之轉（有漏可量·無漏無比），非價值之高下排序。 - 「一法寶勝無量珍寶」之法施無比 ↔ 西方宗教哲學之「象徵／聖言之超越價值」、語言哲學之「以言行事（performative；奧斯汀 J. L. Austin）」（名句文非僅無記之符，乃能成事之言）：西方或讀為「聖言之象徵價值高於物質」，或讀為「言語之施為性」；古德判為「名句文雖無記而能表實相·為菩提因」（吉藏
[0121c09–10]、世親「此法能為菩提因」T1511 [0794a21]）——非西方「象徵價值」之單義，乃唯識「了因顯法身·無漏種」之動轉。 - 「所說法無記·云何得菩提」之疑 ↔ 西方知識論之「描述（無記之名相）如何生規範／轉化（菩提）」、語言哲學之「指號之空性與效能」：西方多就「符號之中性與其效力之張力」立論；古德以「無記之名句正是菩提因」（破薩婆多無記執）——是修證之轉依（聞·思·修藉名句而證），非僅符號學之命題。
- 對觀之要：西方傾向以「福德較量·法施無比」為價值論·語言哲學之命題（二善如何通約·聖言如何超越·符號如何生效）；古德以「福智無比」為轉依·斷障之修證——福不可恃者顯所知障之當捨（執法可恃），一法寶無比者顯般若持菩提之行果，皆可修可證，非靜態之價值排序或符號分析。命題與修證之別，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 [0751c29–0752a04]（原典 · 福智無比分）。六譯本須彌山王七寶較量一段 [出處] 見目二：流支 T0236a [0756b01–b07] · 真諦 T0237 [0765c15–c21] · 笈多 T0238 [0771a01–a07] · 玄奘 T220⑨ [0984c28–0985a05] · 義淨 T0239 [0774c26–0775a02]。 論本（世親二偈·四勝·無著施設大利法）：世親 T1511 [0794a13–b12] · 世親 T1513 [0882c13–0883a04] · 無著 T1510a [0758a18–19·0765a10–11]。 古德：吉藏 T1699 [0121c05–c24] · 智顗 T1698 [0076a22·0078b18–24·0082b17–20] · 窺基 T1700 [0150c27–0151b05]。
1 · Placement in the Sectioning Schemes (the weighing of merit · §17 second half · adding a "structure of weighing" sub-register)
| Sectioning scheme | Placement of this division |
|---|---|
| Zhaoming 32 divisions | Division 24, Merit and Wisdom Beyond Compare (福智無比分) |
| Shi Huijing §17 two-part | Second half (emptiness of dharmas · breaking the four views · the cognitive hindrance; the fourth of the four merit-weighing divisions, reflecting back the incomparability of upholding the sūtra by the vastness of the seven jewels) |
| Dao'an's three-part schema | Main-teaching division · second cycle · the measuring of the merit of upholding the sūtra |
| Asaṅga's eighteen abodes, T1510 | Seventeenth abode, the witnessing of the way (the abode of the pure mind [0758c03–04]), within the buddha-stage's six fulfillments the "mind-fulfillment" subsumes the transformation of the basis, and after its mindfulness-stations comes the third, "setting forth the dharma of great benefit" — 「為施設大利法故，經言『復次，須菩提！三千大千世界中，所有須彌山』」 [0758a18–19]; the lower fascicle re-glosses 「於彼心具足中，為施設大利法故，經言『三千大千世界中，所有須彌』」 [0765a10–11] (the four-line verse upheld is the dharma of great benefit, and the seven-jewels weighing displays its benefit) |
| Vasubandhu's twenty-seven doubts, T1511/T1513 | The doubt "the taught dharma is neutral · it cannot attain awakening" — 「若一切善法滿足得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者，則所說法不能得大菩提。何以故？以所說法無記法故」 (T1511 [0794a13–15] / T1513 [0882c13] marks 「說法雖無記，非不得應知」), answered by "re-stating the superior-merit simile" |
| Jizang (Three-Treatise) T1699 | 「上來明般若體門及信受門竟，今說經是功德門也」 [0121c05]; following the treatise, breaking the Sarvāstivāda "name and phrase are neutral dharmas" doubt and re-raising the comparison (the three-thousand seven-jewels weighed against upholding the sūtra) [0121c06–c10] |
| Zhiyi (Tiantai) T1698 | Following Vasubandhu's twelve sections, it is the seventh, "the section comparing and displaying superiority" [0076a22]; its general sense of comparison 「積寶多而功薄，四句約而福厚」 [0078b18–19], 「以無福為福，故多……心之無性，惑滅解生」 [0082b17–20] (Zhiyi's commentary is terse, not separately treating the Sumeru-mountain-kings passage but subsuming it under "comparing and displaying superiority") |
| Kuiji (Yogācāra) T1700 | Setting forth the dharma of great benefit (following Vasubandhu's "breaking the second sub-segment doubt" [0150c29], i.e. the neutrality doubt); 「論家有四種校量勝：一者、數勝，二者、力勝，三者、無相似勝，四者、因勝」 [0151a19–23]; this master separately establishes the four names "number, reckoning, simile, time" [0151b03] |
The structure of weighing: this division sets up the comparison of "the seven-jewels heap of the Sumeru-mountain-kings / upholding the four-line verse" — directly raising the vastness of the merit of giving (seven jewels equal in measure to all the Sumeru-mountain-kings of the great-thousand, vaster than the "three-thousand seven jewels" of prior weighing-divisions (division 8), "Ganges-sands seven jewels" (division 11)), then abruptly reversing with "upholding a four-line verse and teaching it to others, the former merit does not reach a hundredth part of this," reflecting back the incomparability of upholding the sūtra by the utmost abundance of merit. The four lineages of ancient masters all judge this to be the text of "comparison / weighing" (Jizang "the gate of merit · re-raising the comparison," Zhiyi "the section comparing and displaying superiority," Kuiji "the four kinds of weighing-superiority," Asaṅga "setting forth the dharma of great benefit"). The principle of its reflecting-back, Vasubandhu lays bare in a phrase: although the Sarvāstivāda judges the taught dharma (name, phrase, syllable) to be neutral, it "can be the cause of awakening," and "one dharma-jewel surpasses measureless precious jewels" (T1511 [0794a16–21]); the merit-superiority is fourfold (number · force · no-likeness · cause), "no worldly dharma can be taken as a simile" (T1511 [0794a28–b11]). "Merit and wisdom beyond compare" means the gift of merit can be measured but the gift of wisdom (upholding the sūtra) is beyond compare — the eye of this division displays, through "the weighing of merit," "the incomparability of prajñā's one dharma-jewel." This division has no "is-not" three-clause form (the "is-not" is in the prior division's 「善法即非善法」 and the next division's 「我見即非有我」); register 3 argues from the merit-reflection of the second half, the emptiness of dharmas.
2 · Collation of the Variant Translations (six Chinese versions · the passage on the Sumeru-mountain-king seven-jewels weighing)
Key lines: 諸須彌山王等七寶聚布施 / 受持四句偈為他人說 / 前福於此百分不及一 / 乃至算數譬喻所不能及 (the ancient-master-transmitted Sanskrit micro-numeral names)
| Version | The passage on the Sumeru-mountain-king seven-jewels weighing (verbatim excerpt) | [loc] |
|---|---|---|
| Kumārajīva T235 (root) | 「須菩提！若三千大千世界中所有諸須彌山王，如是等七寶聚，有人持用布施；若人以此《般若波羅蜜經》，乃至四句偈等，受持、讀誦、為他人說，於前福德百分不及一，百千萬億分，乃至算數、譬喻所不能及。」 | 0751c29–0752a04 |
| Bodhiruci T236 | 「須菩提！三千大千世界中，所有諸須彌山王，如是等七寶聚，有人持用布施，若人以此般若波羅蜜經，乃至四句偈等，受持讀誦，為他人說，於前福德，百分不及一，千分不及一，百千萬分不及一，歌羅分不及一，數分不及一，優波尼沙陀分不及一，乃至算數譬喻所不能及。」 | 0756b01–b07 |
| Paramārtha T237 | 「須菩提！三千大千世界，所有諸須彌山王，如是等七寶聚，滿此世界，有人持用布施。若人從此般若波羅蜜經，乃至四句偈等，受持讀誦為他正說，所得功德，以前功德比此功德，百分不及一，千萬億分不及一，窮於算數不及其一，乃至威力品類相應譬喻所不能及。」 | 0765c15–c21 |
| Dharmagupta T238 | 「若復，善實！所有三千大千世界須彌山王，彼所有聚七寶，普散如來、應、等正遍知施與。若此智慧彼岸到，乃至四句等偈，受已，為他等分別，此，善實！福聚，彼前者福聚，百上亦數不及，千上亦，百千上亦，俱致百千上亦，俱致那由他百千上亦，僧企耶亦，迦羅亦，算亦，譬喻亦，憂波泥奢亦，乃至譬喻亦不及。」 | 0771a01–a07 |
| Xuanzang T220⑨ | 「復次，善現！若善男子或善女人，集七寶聚量等三千大千世界其中所有妙高山王，持用布施。若善男子或善女人，於此般若波羅蜜多經中乃至四句伽他，受持、讀誦、究竟通利，及廣為他宣說、開示、如理作意。善現！前說福聚於此福聚，百分計之所不能及，如是千分、若百千分、若俱胝百千分、若俱胝那庾多百千分、若數分、若計分、若算分、若喻分、若鄔波尼殺曇分亦不能及。」 | 0984c28–0985a05 |
| Yijing T239 | 「妙生！若三千大千世界中，所有諸妙高山王，如是等七寶聚，有人持用布施。若復有人，於此經中，乃至一四句頌，若自受持，及為他說。以前福聚比此福聚，假令分此以為百分，彼亦不能及一分，或千分億分算分、勢分、數分、因分，乃至譬喻亦不能及一。」 | 0774c26–0775a02 |
What the variants turn on:
- 「須彌山王／妙高山王」 (Sumeru-mountain-king / Wondrous-High-mountain-king): Kumārajīva, Bodhiruci, Paramārtha, and Dharmagupta have 「須彌山王」 (preserving both sound and sense), Xuanzang and Yijing have 「妙高山王」 (rendering by sense; sumeru = "wondrous high"). The simile-object of the gift swells from "three-thousand seven jewels" (division 8) and "Ganges-sands seven jewels" (division 11) to "a seven-jewels heap equal in measure to the Sumeru-mountain-kings" — using the vastness of the mountain-king to speak to the utmost of merit's abundance, precisely setting up the reflecting-back of the following "does not reach a hundredth part" (Asaṅga "setting forth the dharma of great benefit"
[0758a18–19]; Xuanzang alone explicitly marks 「集七寶聚量等三千大千世界其中所有妙高山王」[0984c28–29], the quantifier most detailed). - The ancient-master-transmitted Sanskrit of the micro-numeral names (the hardest citation-material): the micro-numeral names listed after "does not reach a hundredth part" in the various versions are precisely the textual fingerprint of Vasubandhu's four-superiority verse —
- Kumārajīva: stops at 「百分不及一，百千萬億分，乃至算數、譬喻」
[0752a03–04](an abridged recension; Vasubandhu's treatise notes directly 「此經稍略，餘本不同此也」, see Kuiji[0151a12]). - Bodhiruci: 「百分·千分·百千萬分·歌羅分·數分·優波尼沙陀分」
[0756b04–06](the six names most complete). - Dharmagupta: 「百上·千上·百千上·俱致百千上·俱致那由他百千上·僧企耶（saṃkhyā number）·迦羅（kalā）·算·譬喻·憂波泥奢（upaniṣad）」
[0771a04–07]. - Xuanzang: 「百分·千分·百千分·俱胝百千分·俱胝那庾多百千分·數分·計分·算分·喻分·鄔波尼殺曇分」
[0985a02–05]. - Yijing: 「百分·千分·億分·算分·勢分·數分·因分」
[0775a01–02]. The two micro-numeral names 「歌羅（kalā）／迦羅」 and 「優波尼沙陀（upaniṣad）／憂波泥奢／鄔波尼殺曇」 are precisely what Vasubandhu's four superiorities' "force-superiority (歌羅分)" and "cause-superiority (優波尼沙陀分)" anchor to (see registers 4 and 5).
- Kumārajīva: stops at 「百分不及一，百千萬億分，乃至算數、譬喻」
- Paramārtha's distinctive rendering 「威力品類相應譬喻」: Paramārtha does not list the micro-numeral names, giving instead 「窮於算數不及其一，乃至威力品類相應譬喻所不能及」
[0765c19–21]— "force (force-superiority) · class (no-likeness-superiority)" being two terms that by sense-rendering subsume the four superiorities' "force · no-likeness," each the manifest and latent face of Bodhiruci's and Xuanzang's name-by-name enumeration. - 「受持讀誦／為他人說」 (uphold and recite / teach to others): Kumārajīva 「受持、讀誦、為他人說」
[0752a02–03]; Xuanzang alone fully has 「受持、讀誦、究竟通利，及廣為他宣說、開示、如理作意」[0985a01–02](the Able-to-Cut full phrasing of self-upholding and teaching-others, recorded verbatim, not abridged); Yijing 「若自受持，及為他說」[0775a01]— the two practices of self-benefit (upholding) and benefiting-others (teaching) are precisely the textual proof of Vasubandhu's "the two that can sustain awakening" (see register 4).
3 · “Is-Not” and the Three Natures (the eye · second half · the merit-reflection of the dharma-emptiness station)
This division has no "is-not" three-clause form. The "is-not" is in the prior division (division 23, 「所言善法者，如來說非善法，是名善法」 [0751c27–28]) and the next division (division 25, 「如來說有我者，則非有我」 [0752a09–10], 「凡夫者，如來說非凡夫」); the eye of this division lies not in any "is-not" formula but in the merit-weighing of the emptiness-of-dharmas, second-half station — reflecting back the incomparability of the dharma-gift (prajñā) by measurable merit, that is, "removing merit's real self-nature while preserving its speakable abundance," the turning of the three natures still latently subsumed in the weighing of merit.
The frame of the second half (emptiness of dharmas · breaking the four views · the cognitive hindrance · after the §17 pivot): this division sits in the §17 second half (divisions 17–32), and what it counters is not the first half's self-mark and afflictive hindrance, but the clinging to dharmas · the cognitive hindrance. The doubt it severs — "the taught dharma (name, phrase, syllable) is karmically neutral, how can it attain awakening" (the Sarvāstivāda holding the body of name-phrase-syllable to be neutral · a disjoined conditioning-factor; Jizang [0121c08–09], Vasubandhu T1511 [0794a14–15]) — is precisely one of the clingings to dharmas: clinging to "the substance-nature (neutrality) of the teaching" and doubting whether it can accomplish awakening, a subtle clinging that "discriminates over dharmas." Vasubandhu answers with "this dharma can be the cause of awakening" T1511 [0794a21], "one dharma-jewel surpasses measureless precious jewels" [0794a18] — removing the negation-view that "the dharma-gift is useless" (the emptiness of dharmas is not annihilation, the neutral name-phrase is precisely the cause of awakening), and also removing the augmentation-view that "merit has a real self-nature to be relied upon" (merit can be measured, hence not beyond compare). The first half's "four marks" emptiness-of-self has by this second half turned into the breaking of "the real clinging to dharmas (merit · teaching)" — merit has no real self-nature (it cannot be relied upon as a sufficiency for awakening), and prajñā's one dharma-jewel (which has no self-nature yet can sustain awakening) is alone beyond compare.
The three-natures reading of merit (latently subsumed):
- The merit of the seven-jewels gift (other-dependent) — seven jewels equal in measure to the Sumeru-mountain-kings, a conditionally-arisen contaminated merit, its phenomenal mark standing forth and measurable (Zhiyi 「積寶多而功薄」
[0078b19]; 「明福有實，此即有量」[0082b17–18]). - 「百分不及一·算數譬喻所不能及」 (not a hundredth part · what no reckoning or simile can reach) (removing the wholly-imagined) — removing the clinging that "merit has a real self-nature, can be relied upon as a sufficiency for awakening"; merit, however abundant, "cannot bear up awakening," hence beyond simile against the merit of upholding the sūtra (Vasubandhu's principle of "merit does not sustain awakening," see register 4
T1513 [0877a19–20], here displayed by the "four superiorities"). - 「一法寶勝無量珍寶」 (one dharma-jewel surpasses measureless precious jewels) (establishing the perfectly-accomplished · speakable on the conventional level) — prajñā's one dharma-jewel has no real self-nature (is-not the measurable merit), yet can sustain awakening, can be the cause of awakening, hence its merit is said to be beyond compare (Vasubandhu 「一法寶勝無量珍寶」
T1511 [0794a18], 「由斯一法寶，勝彼寶無量」T1513 [0882c16]).
This merit-reflection reading shares the same principle of the turning of the three natures as Shi Huijing's The "Is-Not" Three-Clause Formula Mapped to the Yogācāra Three Natures 〔from S5-P01〕; this division is one application of it at the emptiness-of-dharmas · merit-weighing station (no overt "is-not" text, yet the three-natures substance of "removing merit's reality · establishing the dharma-jewel"). Carrying the §17 pivot's "the two questions reappear · the turn from emptiness-of-self to emptiness-of-dharmas · the turn from the afflictive to the cognitive hindrance" 〔from The Self-Reenactment of the Diamond Sūtra S5-P07〕: merit-weighing in the first half (division 8) breaks the "real existence of merit" subsumed under the self-mark, and in the second half (this division) breaks "the subtle clinging over dharmas (the teaching being neutral · merit being relied upon)," one merit-application of the "second cycle severing the cognitive hindrance."
4 · Variant Readings of the Ancient Masters (by school · the neutrality doubt · the four kinds of superiority · the one dharma-jewel · weighted)
Core, weighted — Vasubandhu's two verses in the Vajracchedikā-prajñāpāramitā-śāstra (neutral · the one dharma-jewel / number-force-no-likeness-superior · the four superiorities), preserved in two Chinese renderings: Vasubandhu glosses "the taught dharma can attain awakening" (breaking the neutrality doubt) with 「雖言無記法，而說是彼因」, and the four superiorities (the former merit not reaching the four senses of upholding the sūtra) with 「數力無似勝，無似因亦然」, each anchored to the Chinese versions' micro-numeral names; the two renderings differ in name but are one in sense.
Vasubandhu T1511 (Bodhiruci's rendering) — first sets the doubt: 「復有疑，若一切善法滿足得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者，則所說法不能得大菩提。何以故？以所說法無記法故。為斷此疑，重說勝福譬喻」 [0794a13–16]. Verse one [0794a16–17]:
「雖言無記法，而說是彼因；是故一法寶，勝無量珍寶。」
「雖言所說法是無記，而能得大菩提……此法能為菩提因。又言無記者，此義不然。何以故？汝法是無記，而我法是記」 [0794a19–22]; 「是故此所說法，勝彼阿僧祇須彌等珍寶故」 [0794a23–24]. Verse two (the four superiorities) [0794a28–29]:
「數力無似勝，無似因亦然；一切世間法，不可得為喻。」
「示於前福德此福為勝。云何為勝？一者數勝；二者力勝；三者不相似勝；四者因勝」 [0794b01–03]; each anchored to the Chinese versions' micro-numeral names: 「數勝者，如經『百分不及一，乃至算數譬喻所不能及』故」 [0794b04–05]; 「力勝者，如經『不及一歌羅分』故」 [0794b05–06]; 「無似勝者，此福德中數不相似，以此福德不可數故。如經『數不能及』故」 [0794b06–08]; 「因勝者，因果不相似，以此因果勝彼因果故。如經『乃至優波尼沙陀分不及一』故」 [0794b08–10].
Vasubandhu T1513 (Yijing's rendering) — 「說法雖無記，非不得應知」 [0882c13]; 「由非離此能得菩提，故知藉斯菩提方契」 [0882c14–15]. The verse (the one dharma-jewel) [0882c16]:
「由斯一法寶，勝彼寶無量。」
「故此宣說法寶，望前無數妙高無邊之寶，顯福差別」 [0882c17–18]. The verse (reckoning-power-class · four differences) [0882c20–21]:
「於諸算勢類，因亦有差殊，尋思於世間，喻所不能及。」
「謂以此福望前福聚，謂是算勢類。因四種差別，於此世間遍尋思已，無有其喻能比況者」 [0882c22–24]; glossing the four names one by one: 「言由算差別者，始從假為第百分，乃至或為算分不顯差殊」 [0882c24–26]; 「或為勢分者，由其勢力有差殊故，如強弱人事不相並」 [0882c26–27]; 「或為比數者，由品類別，言此福類元不比數前之福類，如貴賤人不相比數」 [0882c27–29]; 「因者明其因，果亦不相干涉故，言彼亦不可與此為因」 [0882c29–0883a01].
〔Correspondence of the two renderings: 無記·而說是彼因 / 說法雖無記·非不得 · 一法寶勝無量珍寶 / 一法寶勝彼寶無量 · 數力無似勝 four superiorities (number · force · no-likeness · cause) / 算勢類 four differences (reckoning · power · number〔ratio-number〕· cause) — one and the same Vasubandhu treatise in two Chinese renderings, differing in name but one in sense. Bodhiruci's 「歌羅分（force）·優波尼沙陀分（cause）」 and Yijing's 「勢分（force）·因分（cause）」 are the name-by-name manifest and latent of the same four superiorities.〕
Asaṅga T1510 (Dharmagupta's rendering): this division belongs to the seventeenth abode, the witnessing of the way of the eighteen abodes (the abode of the pure mind [0758c03–04]), within the "mind-fulfillment" of the buddha-stage's six fulfillments that subsume the transformation of the basis, after its mindfulness-stations · perfect awakening comes the third, "setting forth the dharma of great benefit" — 「為施設大利法故，經言『復次，須菩提！三千大千世界中，所有須彌山』」 [0758a18–19]; the lower fascicle re-glosses 「於彼心具足中，為施設大利法故，經言『三千大千世界中，所有須彌』」 [0765a10–11]. 〔Asaṅga glosses this passage very tersely, only placing the scriptural text in its abode (the four-line verse upheld being the "dharma of great benefit," the seven-jewels weighing displaying its benefit); its four-superiority elaboration is supplied by Vasubandhu's verses (above), and both Kuiji and Jizang gloss it following Vasubandhu's four superiorities.〕
Jizang (Three-Treatise) T1699: classifies it as "the gate of merit" [0121c05] (after the gate of the prajñā substance · the gate of faithful acceptance). Glossing the reason for re-raising the comparison (breaking the neutrality doubt): 「依論生起，從上修一切善法得菩提文生。若言修善法得菩提者，受持此經章句不得菩提。何以故？薩婆多等諸部人云名字句是無記法故也。為破此疑，故重舉也，明名字句雖是無記，能表實相，故受持四句功德無邊」 [0121c06–c10]; 「又汝法中言是無記，我法中明此是般若名字句，豈是無記」 [0121c11–c13]. Following the treatise's four superiorities (each anchored to the micro-numeral names): 「依論，經有四種勝：一者云百分不及一乃至百千分不及一，此是數勝，持經福不可數也。二者、歌羅分不及一，此是力用勝，明經力用勝七寶施力用；三者、優婆尼沙陀分不及一，此云不相似數勝，此是數中微細之數，乃至持經少許福德數，無有與此數相似，故云數勝。四者、因果勝，此經因果勝餘因果也」 [0121c17–c24].
Zhiyi (Tiantai) T1698: following Vasubandhu's twelve sections, this division belongs to the seventh, "the section comparing and displaying superiority" [0076a22]. Its general sense of comparison (terse, not separately treating the Sumeru-mountain-kings passage): 「積寶多而功薄，四句約而福厚……七寶是事善、緣因，天人果報不動不出，故以動出之慧導之得成菩提，一念圓信能導眾善，此心為勝」 [0078b18–24]; 「明福有實，此即有量，豈得多耶？以無福為福，故多也……福德無實則可曠施而多。心之無性，惑滅解生也」 [0082b17–20]. 〔Zhiyi subsumes all the merit-weighing under the single section "comparing and displaying superiority," running through it the one sense of "the terse yet rich merit · taking no-merit as merit," not glossing division by division; so the gloss of this division (the Sumeru-mountain-kings' seven jewels) is seen in his general sense.〕
Kuiji (Yogācāra) T1700: classifies it as setting forth the dharma of great benefit (following Vasubandhu's "breaking the second sub-segment doubt," i.e. the neutrality doubt [0150c29]; 「其能詮教有名、句、文，體是無記，如何聽聞而生善耶？此是小乘人疑也」 [0151a03–05]); 「無著云，此即心具足中第三為施設大利法故」 [0151a06–07]. Glossing the neutrality doubt: 「世親云，此法雖言無記而能得菩提，以遠離所說法，不能得大菩提故，此法能為菩提因故；又言無記者，不然！汝法是無記，我法是善故，此就彼宗釋，佛語是善也」 [0151a13–18]. Glossing the four superiorities (the four kinds of weighing-superiority): 「『百分不及一』等者，論家有四種校量勝，謂一者、數勝，二者、力勝，三者、無相似勝，四者、因勝」 [0151a19–23]; 「數勝者，謂以數校量……若受持此經，當得成佛所有功德，非此數等之所校量，故云數勝也」 [0151a23–a26]; 「力勝者，名為情計勝，謂布施等所獲世間人天善果情計可知，今此受、持之因，情計所不計度也」 [0151a26–a28]; 「不相似勝者，謂喻勝也……受、持之因所得勝果，無喻以可喻也」 [0151a28–b01]; 「因勝者，謂時勝，世間福果可以時限校量多少，此所得果，盡未來際無時分限，不可校量也。如論四名，當人立數、計、喻、時等名也」 [0151b01–b03].
The three lineages of ancient masters (Three-Treatise · Tiantai · Yogācāra) all converge on Vasubandhu's two verses at this division: the taught dharma, though neutral, can attain awakening = one dharma-jewel surpasses measureless precious jewels (Jizang "name and phrase, though neutral, can manifest the real mark," Kuiji "my dharma is good · this dharma can be the cause of awakening"); the former merit does not reach upholding the sūtra in four superiorities = number · force · no-likeness · cause (Jizang "number · force · no-likeness · cause-and-fruit" each anchored to 歌羅分·優婆尼沙陀分; Kuiji "number · force · no-likeness · cause" separately establishing the four names "number, reckoning, simile, time"; Zhiyi subsuming "terse yet rich · taking no-merit as merit"). The eye of weighing displays, through "the vastness of the seven jewels (the Sumeru-mountain-king)," "the incomparability of prajñā's one dharma-jewel" — this is the ancient masters' settled reading of "Merit and Wisdom Beyond Compare" in this division.
5 · Terminology
須彌山王／妙高山王 sumeru-parvata-rāja (Sumeru = Wondrous-High; Jizang 「須彌，此云妙高山，亦云安明山」 [0112a09]; Zhiyi 「須彌，翻云安明」 [0079a07]; Xuanzang and Yijing have 「妙高山王」) ·
七寶聚 sapta-ratna-rāśi (a seven-jewels heap equal in measure to the Sumeru-mountain-king; Asaṅga judges this to be the weighing-simile of "setting forth the dharma of great benefit" [0758a18–19]) ·
歌羅分／迦羅 kalā (one of the micro-numeral names; Vasubandhu judges it as the anchor of "force-superiority" — 「力勝者，如經『不及一歌羅分』故」 T1511 [0794b05–06]; Jizang 「歌羅分不及一，此是力用勝」 [0121c20–21]) ·
優波尼沙陀分／憂波泥奢／鄔波尼殺曇 upaniṣad (one of the micro-numeral names · a number of the utmost minuteness; Vasubandhu judges it as the anchor of "cause-superiority" — 「因勝者……如經『乃至優波尼沙陀分不及一』故」 T1511 [0794b08–10]; Jizang 「優婆尼沙陀分不及一，此云不相似數勝……數中微細之數」 [0121c21–23]) ·
僧企耶 saṃkhyā (number; Dharmagupta alone preserves this name [0771a06]) ·
四種校量勝 (the four kinds of weighing-superiority: number · force · no-likeness〔no-resemblance〕· cause; Vasubandhu T1511 [0794b01–03]; Kuiji separately establishes "number, reckoning, simile, time" [0151b03]; Yijing's rendering gives "reckoning · power · 〔ratio-〕number · cause" four differences T1513 [0882c24–0883a01]) ·
無記（法） avyākṛta (the Sarvāstivāda holding the body of name-phrase-syllable to be neutral · a disjoined conditioning-factor; Jizang 「薩婆多等諸部人云名字句是無記法」 [0121c08–09]; Vasubandhu 「所說法無記法故」 T1511 [0794a14–15], Kuiji 「能詮教有名、句、文，體是無記」 [0151a02–03]) ·
一法寶 (the one dharma-jewel · prajñā's name-phrase · the dharma-gift that can sustain awakening) eka-dharma-ratna (Vasubandhu 「是故一法寶，勝無量珍寶」 T1511 [0794a18] / 「由斯一法寶，勝彼寶無量」 T1513 [0882c16]). 〔Sanskrit as a pronunciation aid; the variant renderings of the micro-numeral names "歌羅·優波尼沙陀·僧企耶" are at register 2.〕
6 · Simile and Rhetoric (the structure of weighing · the Sumeru-mountain-king reflecting back · the descent of micro-numerals)
This division has no concrete bodily simile (the empty-space simile is at division 4, the patience-ascetic simile at division 14, the dharma-body great-body Sumeru simile at divisions 10 · 17). The point of the rhetoric lies in the reversal of weighing and the descent of micro-numerals:
- The piling-up of the Sumeru-mountain-king: the gift-object swells from the prior weighing-divisions' "three-thousand seven jewels" (division 8) and "Ganges-sands seven jewels" (division 11) to "a seven-jewels heap equal in measure to all the Sumeru-mountain-kings of the great-thousand" — using the vastness of the mountain-king (the greatest of the ten jewel-mountains, Jizang 「須彌於十寶山中最大」
[0112a08]) to speak to the utmost of merit's abundance, precisely at the summit of merit's abundance. - The reversal of weighing: abruptly turned into "upholding a four-line verse and teaching it to others, the former merit does not reach a hundredth part" — reflecting back the incomparability of upholding the sūtra (the immeasurable superiority) by the vastness of the mountain-king (the utmost measurable abundance); the more extreme the mountain-king's vastness, the more manifest the sūtra's incomparability. Vasubandhu judges this merit "displays the merit-difference against the prior measureless boundless Wondrous-High jewels"
T1513 [0882c17–18]; Zhiyi 「積寶多而功薄，四句約而福厚」[0078b18–19]— the vast becomes the foil, the incomparable becomes the superior. - The descent of micro-numerals: 「百分·千分·百千萬億分·〔歌羅分·數分·優波尼沙陀分〕·乃至算數、譬喻所不能及」 — using the micro-numeral names (kalā 歌羅 · upaniṣad 優波尼沙陀, the minutest of numbers) to descend tier by tier, speaking to the utmost minuteness of "not reaching even one part" of the former merit against upholding the sūtra. Vasubandhu matches this descent of micro-numerals to the four superiorities (number · force · no-likeness · cause), 「一切世間法，不可得為喻」
T1511 [0794a29]— exhausting every number of worldly comparison (reckoning · power · ratio · cause) yet unable to take a simile, the rhetorical extreme of "beyond compare."
This brushstroke of "the vast reflecting back · the descent of micro-numerals" shares one and the same structure of comparative reversal with division 8's "abundant merit yet is-not the nature of merit" and division 11's "Ganges-sands seven jewels not matching upholding the sūtra," yet with the vastness of the "Sumeru-mountain-king" and the utmost minuteness of the micro-numeral names, even more so than the prior divisions. This "structure of weighing" recurs and revolves through the four merit-weighing divisions (8 · 11 · 15 · 24), and this division (the Sumeru-mountain-king · the four-superiority micro-numerals) is its extreme. Concrete simile is weighted at divisions 4 · 14 · 26 · 32.
7 · Cross-Reading
- Baifa (T1614): the mind-disjoined conditioning-factor dharmas (name-body · phrase-body · syllable-body) — the doubt this division breaks, "the name-phrase-syllable (name and phrase) is neutral," precisely concerns the substance-nature judgment of the three disjoined conditioning-factors "name-body · phrase-body · syllable-body" of the hundred dharmas (the Sarvāstivāda holding them neutral, prajñā showing them able to manifest the real mark · being the cause of awakening).
- Thirty Verses (T1586): the two emptinesses · the transformation of the basis (v.29 the perfectly-accomplished) · the uncontaminated seed — this division's "upholding the sūtra (prajñā's one dharma-jewel) can sustain awakening · be the cause of awakening" is just the scriptural correspondence of the uncontaminated cause · the basis of the transformation of the basis.
- Twenty Verses (T1590): consciousness-only without object · merit and the mind — the former merit (the seven-jewels gift) is a contaminated, conditionally-arisen merit, and "it cannot be relied upon as a sufficiency for awakening" is just the merit-reflection of consciousness-only's "the object has no reality · the mind manifests it."
- Madhyānta-vibhāga (T1600): the chapter on the real · the conventional and the ultimate — "the taught dharma, though neutral (the conventional name-phrase), can attain awakening (the ultimate signified)" is just the treatise-correspondence of the Madhyānta's mutual identity of the conventional and ultimate truths.
- Mahāyāna-saṃgraha (T1594): the section on the wisdom that is the fruit · the dharma-body · the revealing cause — this division's "upholding the sūtra, the one dharma-jewel, surpasses measureless precious jewels · can sustain awakening" is just the treatise of Shelun's "the dharma-gift · the revealing cause manifesting the dharma-body" (cf. division 8's correspondence of "the revealing cause / the producing cause").
- Cheng weishi lun (T1585): the neutral · the uncontaminated seed · the revealing cause and the producing cause — this division's "name-phrase-syllable is neutral · yet can be the cause of awakening" is just the technical-term correspondence of Cheng weishi lun's "the body of name-phrase-syllable (a disjoined conditioning-factor provisional dharma) · the uncontaminated seed · the revealing cause."
- Heart Sūtra (T251): 「無智亦無得」 (no wisdom and no attainment) — this division's "merit not reaching a hundredth part · what no reckoning or simile can reach" is just the merit-station of "nothing attained" (merit has no real self-nature to be relied upon, and prajñā's one dharma-jewel is alone beyond compare).
This division's "the taught dharma is neutral yet can attain awakening · one dharma-jewel surpasses measureless precious jewels · the four kinds of weighing-superiority" is just the scriptural correspondence of Baifa's "body of name-phrase-syllable," the Thirty Verses' and Cheng weishi lun's "uncontaminated seed · revealing cause · transformation of the basis"; "not a hundredth part" is just the merit-station of the Heart Sūtra's "nothing attained." Shi Huijing's thesis "what the Diamond Sūtra says in scriptural language, Cheng weishi lun says in technical language" 〔from From the Hundred Dharmas to the Diamond Sūtra S5-P10〕: the Diamond Sūtra's single phrase "one dharma-jewel surpasses measureless precious jewels," Vasubandhu's treatise says with the technical terms "the neutral name-phrase · can be the cause of awakening · the revealing cause." 〔Convention: list only what is genuinely pertinent; no forced pegging — linkage, not padding. The ancient-master citations are at register 4, and the cross-reading is linkage only, not citing the ancient masters verbatim. Cheng weishi lun is in progress; cited by stable name, an additive link to follow on completion.〕
8 · East–West Observation (Western perspective · observation, not adjudication)
- The incommensurability of merit in 「百分不及一·算數譬喻所不能及」 ↔ Western axiology's "incommensurability of value" (J. Raz) and the distinction of quantity and quality (the quantity of seven jewels against the quality of upholding the sūtra): the West mostly reads it as a value-hierarchy of "two goods that cannot be commensurated · without a common measure"; the ancient masters' / Yogācāra reading is a turn of merit's substance-nature — the former merit (seven jewels) is not inferior to upholding the sūtra in a "quantitative shortfall," but is a qualitative difference of "unable to bear up awakening" (Vasubandhu 「福不持菩提，彼二能持」
T1513 [0877a19–20], here displayed by the "four superiorities"), a turn of substance-nature (the contaminated measurable · the uncontaminated incomparable), not a high-low ranking of value. - The incomparability of the dharma-gift in 「一法寶勝無量珍寶」 ↔ Western philosophy of religion's "the transcendent value of the symbol / the sacred word," philosophy of language's "performatives" (J. L. Austin) (name-phrase-syllable not a merely neutral sign but a word that can accomplish): the West may read it as "the symbolic value of the sacred word exceeding the material," or as "the performativity of speech"; the ancient masters judge it as "name-phrase-syllable, though neutral, can manifest the real mark · be the cause of awakening" (Jizang
[0121c09–10], Vasubandhu 「此法能為菩提因」T1511 [0794a21]) — not the West's univocal "symbolic value" but the Yogācāra turning of "the revealing cause manifesting the dharma-body · the uncontaminated seed." - The doubt 「所說法無記·云何得菩提」 ↔ Western epistemology's "how description (the neutral name-mark) gives rise to the normative / transformative (awakening)," philosophy of language's "the emptiness and efficacy of the sign": the West mostly argues from "the tension between the neutrality of the symbol and its efficacy"; the ancient masters with "the neutral name-phrase is precisely the cause of awakening" (breaking the Sarvāstivāda neutrality-clinging) — this is the transformation of the basis through cultivation-and-witness (hearing · reflecting · cultivating, witnessing through the name-phrase), not a merely semiotic thesis.
- The point of the observation: the West tends to take "the weighing of merit · the incomparability of the dharma-gift" as theses of axiology and philosophy of language (how two goods commensurate · how the sacred word transcends · how the symbol takes effect); the ancient masters take "merit and wisdom beyond compare" as the cultivation-and-witness of the transformation of the basis · the severing of hindrances — merit not to be relied upon displays the cognitive hindrance to be abandoned (clinging that dharmas can be relied upon), the one dharma-jewel beyond compare displays prajñā's fruit-of-practice sustaining awakening, all practicable and witnessable, not a static value-ranking or symbolic analysis. The difference between thesis and cultivation-and-witness is just one East–West note worth marking.
- (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 [0751c29–0752a04] (root text · Merit and Wisdom Beyond Compare). The six versions' passage on the Sumeru-mountain-king seven-jewels weighing, [loc] at register 2: Bodhiruci T0236a [0756b01–b07] · Paramārtha T0237 [0765c15–c21] · Dharmagupta T0238 [0771a01–a07] · Xuanzang T220⑨ [0984c28–0985a05] · Yijing T0239 [0774c26–0775a02]. Treatises (Vasubandhu's two verses · the four superiorities · Asaṅga's setting forth the dharma of great benefit): Vasubandhu T1511 [0794a13–b12] · Vasubandhu T1513 [0882c13–0883a04] · Asaṅga T1510a [0758a18–19·0765a10–11]. Ancient masters: Jizang T1699 [0121c05–c24] · Zhiyi T1698 [0076a22·0078b18–24·0082b17–20] · Kuiji T1700 [0150c27–0151b05].
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 24 · Merit and Wisdom Beyond Compare · apparatus · Spring 2026