金剛般若波羅蜜經 分二十八 不受不貪分
裝得滿恒河沙數世界的七寶，拿去布施，福德不可謂不大；可是佛說，這還比不上一個「知一切法無我，得成於忍」的人。差別在哪裡？前者作大福而暗暗指望一個果報，後者卻通達了人法兩重無我，於一切法上再無可貪可得。須菩提聽佛說「諸菩薩不受福德」，不免一驚——難道菩薩不作福了？佛的答覆把這層誤會輕輕揭開：菩薩所作的福德，並非不作、並非不受，只是「不應貪著」，所以才說不受。受其善，而不貪其報；福德宛然在，而那條繫向有漏果報的暗線，當下斬斷。要緊的是看清：「不受」不是把福掃成空，是遣掉「福為實得」那一層執；正如「無我得忍」不是咬牙強忍，是於無我處自然不生。福德不繫於報，便不再墮回生死的流轉，反成了趣向出世的資糧——這受而不取的一念，正是「應無所住而生其心」落在福德上的樣子。
Take the seven treasures enough to fill world-systems as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, and give them all away in charity — the merit could hardly be called small; yet the Buddha says it still does not match a single person who 「知一切法無我，得成於忍」(knows that all dharmas are without self, and attains the forbearance thereof). Where lies the difference? The former does great merit while secretly hoping for a fruit of reward; the latter has penetrated both no-selves — of persons and of dharmas — and so, with respect to all dharmas, has nothing left to crave and nothing to attain. When Subhūti hears the Buddha say 「諸菩薩不受福德」(bodhisattvas do not receive merit), he cannot help being startled — does a bodhisattva, then, no longer make merit at all? The Buddha's answer gently lifts away the misunderstanding: the merit a bodhisattva makes is not unmade and not unreceived; it is only that he 「不應貪著」(ought not to crave and cling to it), and that is why it is said he does not receive it. He receives its good, yet does not crave its reward; the merit remains perfectly present, while the hidden thread that would tie it toward a tainted, retributive fruit is severed on the spot. What matters is to see clearly: "not receiving" is not sweeping merit away into emptiness, but dispelling that one overlay of "merit as a real attainment" — just as "attaining forbearance through no-self" is not a teeth-gritting effort to endure, but the natural non-arising that comes of resting where there is no self. Once merit is no longer bound to reward, it no longer falls back into the wandering flow of birth-and-death, but turns instead into provision oriented toward transcendence. This single thought of receiving-yet-not-grasping is just what 「應無所住而生其心」(let the mind arise without abiding anywhere) looks like when it comes to rest upon merit.
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 28 · Not Receiving, Not Grasping · essence · Spring 2026
〔一〕無我得忍之福，勝過恒沙七寶之施
經曰：
「須菩提！若菩薩以滿恒河沙等世界七寶布施；若復有人知一切法無我，得成於忍，此菩薩勝前菩薩所得功德。須菩提！以諸菩薩不受福德故。」
「須菩提！假如有菩薩，拿足以裝滿恒河沙那麼多個世界的七寶去布施；可是另有一人，能了知一切法都沒有實在的我、因而成就了忍，那麼這個人所得的功德，要勝過前面那位行大布施的菩薩。須菩提！這是因為諸菩薩並不領受福德的緣故。」
〔二〕須菩提請問：怎麼說菩薩不受福德
經曰：
須菩提白佛言：「世尊！云何菩薩不受福德？」
須菩提對佛說：「世尊！為什麼說菩薩不領受福德呢？」
〔三〕佛答：所作福德不應貪著，是故說不受
經曰：
「須菩提！菩薩所作福德，不應貪著，是故說不受福德。
「須菩提！菩薩所作的福德，不應當貪戀執著，正因為這樣，才說『不領受福德』。」
[1] The merit of attaining the patience of no-self surpasses the gift of seven treasures as many as the Ganges' sands
The sūtra says:
「須菩提！若菩薩以滿恒河沙等世界七寶布施；若復有人知一切法無我，得成於忍，此菩薩勝前菩薩所得功德。須菩提！以諸菩薩不受福德故。」
"Subhūti! Suppose a bodhisattva were to give away, as a gift, enough of the seven treasures to fill as many world-systems as there are sands in the Ganges; and suppose there were another person who comes to know that all dharmas are without self, and thereby achieves patient acceptance. This person's merit surpasses that of the former bodhisattva who gave the great gift. Subhūti! This is because the bodhisattvas do not receive merit."
[2] Subhūti asks: in what sense do bodhisattvas not receive merit?
The sūtra says:
須菩提白佛言：「世尊！云何菩薩不受福德？」
Subhūti said to the Buddha, "World-Honored One! Why is it said that bodhisattvas do not receive merit?"
[3] The Buddha answers: the merit one does should not be grasped after — therefore it is called "not receiving"
The sūtra says:
「須菩提！菩薩所作福德，不應貪著，是故說不受福德。
"Subhūti! The merit a bodhisattva does should not be coveted or clung to. It is for this reason that we say he 'does not receive merit.'"
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 28 · Not Receiving, Not Grasping · vernacular · Spring 2026
拿二無我（人無我·法無我）、三性（遍計所執·依他起·圓成實）、三忍、二取二障、轉依來照金剛經的「無我得忍·不受福德」。
承樞紐而來：這一分照的是「法執」這一層
上一分（究竟無我）把教法轉入法空，顯「實無有法可得」；那是全經「二周說」的接縫——前一周破我相、淨煩惱障，後一周破法相、轉斷所知障。這一分緊接其後，把那把「無所得」之刀，落到兩處最容易再起執的地方：一是「成就」之福，二是「忍」所達的法。
用唯識的眼看，這一分照的正是後半的那層細執。眾生（乃至行道之人）在「我所作的福德」上，會妄起一個「實有福可得、有漏果報可貪」的執；在「我所通達的法」上，會妄起一個「實有法相可取」的執——這兩處執的，都不是粗重的人我，而是更細的法我執，所障的是成佛遍知的所知障。所以這一分不在前半「相·眾生·福多寡」那一邊，而在後半「法為實、福為實得」這一邊。古德把它判得很穩：吉藏說「今為格量菩薩無我忍也，此是人法無我，故名無我忍」，智顗科為「結般若成忍」，窺基（依世親、無著）逕讀「了達二我空故而得於忍」——三家同把這一分接在樞紐之後的法空位上續說。
「知一切法無我，得成於忍」：兩重無我，才叫無我忍
佛先立一個較量：拿足以裝滿恒河沙數世界的七寶去布施，那福德不可謂不大；可是另有一人「知一切法無我，得成於忍」，他的功德反而勝過前者。要緊的是這個「無我」要讀得準。
唯識說，眾生的迷執有兩重：把五蘊身心執為實在的「我」，是人我執；把心所變現的諸法執為心外實有的「法」，是法我執。這一分的「知一切法無我」，不是只空掉一個「我」，而是連「一切法」都說無我——所以古德一致把它讀作人法二無我（二空）：世親說「有二種無我，不生二種無我相」，吉藏說「此是人法無我，故名無我忍」，窺基說「了達二我空故而得於忍」。唯通達這兩重無我，所成的忍才叫「無我忍」；只空人我、不空法我，是不夠的。這正是樞紐分十七「通達無我、法」（人法二空）的續行：那裡開了法空之門，這裡就在「忍」上落實它。
那「忍」又是什麼忍？羅什只渾然說「得成於忍」，異譯則點明是「無生法忍」（流支、真諦並益「無生」二字）。窺基把這忍順三性讀作三重——
- 本性無生忍：觀遍計所執的人、法二相本來就無體（所執的實我實法，當體即空）。
- 自然無生忍：觀依他起的諸法，是依眾緣而生，並沒有一個「自然而然、不待緣」的自性（依他＝依靠眾多條件而起）。
- 惑苦無生忍：觀真如（圓成實）上，惑與苦本來不生。
三忍正配三性：遣遍計、了依他、顯圓成。所以「得成於忍」不是咬牙強忍，是於二無我中、隨三性照見諸法本來無生——忍由空而成，不由力強。
「不受福德」：受而不取，遣的是「福為實得」之執
接著佛說一句似乎要把福德全盤推翻的話：「以諸菩薩不受福德故。」須菩提聽了不解，便問：怎麼說菩薩不受福德？佛答：「菩薩所作福德，不應貪著，是故說不受福德。」——原來「不受」不是不作福、不是沒有福，是受其善而不貪其報。
這「受而不取」的結構，在唯識的鏡裡看得最清楚，也正是「即非」一式施於福德的一施。能斷一系（流支、笈多、玄奘三譯）把它說成三句：「菩薩受福德，不取福德，是故菩薩取福德。」一句裡三轉，恰是三性——
- 受福德＝依他起：福德不是沒有，它是緣修善行所生、世諦上可說可受的緣生之福（窺基說是「菩薩所行福德」，真諦譯作「可得攝持」）。所以可「受」、所以末了還說「是故取」。
- 不取福德＝遣遍計所執：所遣的，是那層「實有福可得、貪著有漏果報」的妄執。世親說得直接：「取者，彼福德得有漏果報……此福德無報。」窺基說「不著自體等故，但希出世，故云不受」，真諦說「不可執取」。「不取」遣的是「福為實得」之執，不是說沒有福。
- 是故取福德／是故說不受＝立圓成、存假名：遣盡了那層貪著有漏報的妄執，無實得而真如所攝的無漏之福宛然可受。世親「是福德無報，如是受不取」，義淨論「彼福無報故，正取非越取」——受其無漏之善（正取），不貪其有漏之報（非越取）。羅什一句「不應貪著，是故說不受福德」，說的正是這個：不貪著，才叫不受。
所以「不受不貪」不是把福德掃成空，是在福德上遣掉那層遍計的實得之執，而圓成的無漏資糧照樣成立——遣而不墮於無，這與全經「即非·是名」同一個樞。
福德無報：所遣者，是「有漏」那一層
何以一面說「不受」、一面又說「是故取」？關鍵在世親點出的「福德無報」。眾生作福，多半暗暗指望一個果報——這指望本身，就把福德縛在有漏的生死流轉裡（世親「取者，彼福德得有漏果報……如取非道故」，像走岔了正路去走險道）。菩薩之「不取」，正是斬斷這條「貪報」的暗線：福德不招有漏之報，所以受它而不繫於報。無著把這一層判在佛地「不住生死涅槃」的「不住流轉」上——福聚「不應受、不應取」，不是因為福德可厭，是因為一受著、一取著有漏報，就墮回流轉。受其無漏、不貪其有漏，這正是轉依所顯的福位：把那貪著有漏的染心轉掉，福德便成了趣向出世的智資糧（世親「以能成就智慧莊嚴、功德莊嚴故」）。
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——二無我、三性、三忍、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「無我得忍·受而不取」的實相，金剛經以經語（知一切法無我·不受福德）說，唯識以論語（二無我·三性三無性·斷所知障·轉依無得）說，兩相對照，其義益顯。三十頌以二空遣二執而歸於轉依、說「無得」，正與本分「知一切法無我·得忍」「不受福德·受而不取」相印；成唯識論說斷二障、證二空真如、遣所知障所執的「福為實得」之法執，與窺基「了達二我空故而得於忍」相應；辯中邊論辨真實、辨二空、明後半法空所知障淨，是本分「二無我·無生法忍」的論本對讀；二十論破心外實法，與「知一切法無我」遣法執一脈；般若一系的心經「以無所得故」「無智亦無得」，正是本分「不受福德·受而不取·無實得」的同一無得法位。一句收束：金剛經以經語說的「知一切法無我，得成於忍」「不受福德」，成唯識論以「二空真如·無生法忍·斷所知障·無漏資糧·轉依無得」的技術語說的，是同一件事〔「不受不貪」即「應無所住而生其心」之轉依·無得義（S5-P06）〕。
Bringing the two selflessnesses (人無我 the selflessness of persons · 法無我 the selflessness of dharmas), the three natures (遍計所執 the wholly-imagined · 依他起 the other-dependent · 圓成實 the perfectly-accomplished), the three forbearances, the two graspings and two hindrances, and the transformation of the basis, to reflect the sūtra’s “no-self attaining forbearance · not receiving merit.” The mirror is not the sūtra: Yogācāra is not the source of the Diamond Sūtra but one mirror for reading it.
Coming Down from the Pivot: This Division Reflects the Layer of “Clinging to a Self in Dharmas”
The preceding division (Ultimately, No Self) turned the teaching into the emptiness of dharmas, disclosing “in reality there is no dharma that can be attained”; that is the seam of the whole sūtra’s “two-round teaching” — the first round breaks the mark of self and purifies the afflictive hindrance, the latter round breaks the mark of dharmas and severs-by-transformation the cognitive hindrance. This division follows directly, letting that blade of “nothing attained” fall upon two places where clinging most easily rises again: one is the merit of “accomplishment,” the other is the dharma reached by “forbearance.”
Seen with the Yogācāra eye, this division reflects precisely that fine clinging of the latter half. Sentient beings — and even those who walk the path — upon “the merit I have done” will wrongly rouse a clinging that “there really is merit to be attained, a tainted reward to be coveted”; upon “the dharma I have penetrated” they will wrongly rouse a clinging that “there really is a mark of dharmas to be grasped.” What both grasp is not the coarse self-in-persons but the finer clinging to a self in dharmas (法我執), obstructing the omniscience of buddhahood — the cognitive hindrance (所知障). So this division stands not on the earlier half’s side of “marks · beings · much-or-little merit,” but on the latter half’s side of “dharmas-as-real, merit-as-real-attainment.” The ancient masters judge it steadily: Jizang says 「今為格量菩薩無我忍也，此是人法無我，故名無我忍」— now is the measuring of the bodhisattva’s forbearance of no-self; this is the selflessness of persons and dharmas, hence called the forbearance of no-self; Zhiyi assigns it as “concluding prajñā into forbearance”; Kuiji (following Vasubandhu and Asaṅga) reads it directly as 「了達二我空故而得於忍」— penetrating the emptiness of the two selves, one thus attains forbearance. All three place this division upon the position of the emptiness of dharmas that continues after the pivot.
“Knowing All Dharmas to Be Without Self, One Accomplishes Forbearance”: Two Layers of No-Self Make the Forbearance of No-Self
The Buddha first sets up a comparison: to give in charity the seven treasures enough to fill worlds as many as the sands of the Ganges — that merit can hardly be called small; yet another person who 「知一切法無我，得成於忍」— knows all dharmas to be without self and accomplishes forbearance — his virtue surpasses the former. What matters is to read this “no-self” precisely.
Yogācāra teaches that the deluded clinging of beings has two layers: to grasp the five aggregates of body-and-mind as a real “self” is the clinging to a self in persons (人我執); to grasp the dharmas manifested by mind as “dharmas” really existent outside the mind is the clinging to a self in dharmas (法我執). This division’s “knowing all dharmas to be without self” empties not merely the one “self,” but says that even “all dharmas” are without self — and so the ancient masters with one voice read it as the selflessness of both persons and dharmas (人法二無我, the two emptinesses): Vasubandhu says 「有二種無我，不生二種無我相」— there are two kinds of no-self; one does not give rise to the two marks of no-self; Jizang says 「此是人法無我，故名無我忍」— this is the selflessness of persons and dharmas, hence called the forbearance of no-self; Kuiji says 「了達二我空故而得於忍」— penetrating the emptiness of the two selves, one thus attains forbearance. Only by penetrating both layers of no-self is the forbearance accomplished worthy of the name “forbearance of no-self”; to empty only the self-in-persons and not the self-in-dharmas is not enough. This is the continued course of Division 17’s “penetrating the no-self of persons and of dharmas” (人法二空): there the gate of the emptiness of dharmas was opened; here it is made good upon “forbearance.”
And what forbearance is this? Kumārajīva says only, undivided, “accomplishes forbearance,” while the variant translations make plain that it is the “forbearance of the non-arising of dharmas” (無生法忍, Bodhiruci and Paramārtha both adding the two words “non-arising”). Kuiji reads this forbearance, following the three natures, as threefold —
- The forbearance of intrinsic non-arising (本性無生忍): contemplating that the two marks of self and dharmas in the wholly-imagined (遍計所執) are inherently without essence (the grasped real self and real dharmas are, in their very being, empty).
- The forbearance of natural non-arising (自然無生忍): contemplating that the dharmas of the other-dependent (依他起) arise in dependence on a manifold of conditions and have no “self-so, condition-free” intrinsic nature (依他 = arising in reliance on a manifold of conditions).
- The forbearance of the non-arising of affliction and suffering (惑苦無生忍): contemplating that upon suchness (真如, the perfectly-accomplished, 圓成實) affliction and suffering are inherently non-arising.
The three forbearances match exactly the three natures: dispelling the wholly-imagined, penetrating the other-dependent, disclosing the perfectly-accomplished. So “accomplishing forbearance” is not gritting one’s teeth to endure; it is, within the two selflessnesses, seeing in accord with the three natures that all dharmas are inherently non-arising — forbearance accomplished through emptiness, not forced through by effort.
“Not Receiving Merit”: Receiving but Not Grasping — Dispelling the Clinging That “Merit Is a Real Attainment”
The Buddha next speaks a sentence that seems to overturn merit wholesale: 「以諸菩薩不受福德故」— because the bodhisattvas do not receive merit. Subhūti, not understanding, asks: how is it said that bodhisattvas do not receive merit? The Buddha answers: 「菩薩所作福德，不應貪著，是故說不受福德」— the merit a bodhisattva does should not be coveted with attachment; therefore it is said they do not receive merit. So “not receiving” is not doing no merit, not having no merit; it is receiving its good without coveting its reward.
This structure of “receiving but not grasping” is seen most clearly in the Yogācāra mirror, and is precisely one application of the “is-not” pattern upon merit. The Nengduan lineage (the three translations of Bodhiruci, Dharmagupta, and Xuanzang) puts it as three phrases: 「菩薩受福德，不取福德，是故菩薩取福德」— the bodhisattva receives merit, does not grasp merit, therefore the bodhisattva grasps merit. Three turns in one sentence, which are just the three natures —
- Receiving merit (受福德) = the other-dependent: merit is not nothing; it is dependently-arisen merit produced by the cultivation of good deeds, sayable and receivable on the conventional level (Kuiji says it is 「菩薩所行福德」— the merit a bodhisattva practices; Paramārtha renders it 「可得攝持」— capable of being held and maintained). So it can be “received,” and so at the end it still says “therefore grasps.”
- Not grasping merit (不取福德) = dispelling the wholly-imagined: what is dispelled is the layer of wrong clinging that “there really is merit to be attained, and the tainted reward is coveted.” Vasubandhu says it directly: 「取者，彼福德得有漏果報……此福德無報」— to grasp is for that merit to win a tainted reward… this merit is without reward. Kuiji says 「不著自體等故，但希出世，故云不受」— because of not being attached to its very being, only aspiring to the supramundane, it is called not receiving; Paramārtha says 「不可執取」— it cannot be grasped and clung to. “Not grasping” dispels the clinging that “merit is a real attainment”; it does not say there is no merit.
- Therefore grasps merit / therefore it is said not received (是故取福德／是故說不受) = establishing the perfectly-accomplished, preserving the provisional name: having dispelled that layer of clinging to a coveted tainted reward, the untainted merit (無漏之福) that is without real attainment and subsumed by suchness is vividly there to be received. Vasubandhu says 「是福德無報，如是受不取」— this merit is without reward; thus it is received but not grasped; Yijing’s treatise says 「彼福無報故，正取非越取」— because that merit is without reward, it is rightly grasped, not over-grasped — receiving its untainted good (rightly grasping), not coveting its tainted reward (not over-grasping). Kumārajīva’s phrase 「不應貪著，是故說不受福德」— should not covet with attachment; therefore it is said not received — states exactly this: only by not coveting is it called not received.
So “not receiving, not grasping” is not sweeping merit into emptiness; it is dispelling, upon merit, that layer of wholly-imagined real-attainment, while the perfectly-accomplished’s untainted provision stands intact — dispelling without falling into nothing, which is the same pivot as the whole sūtra’s “is-not, is called.”
Merit Is Without Reward: What Is Dispelled Is the “Tainted” Layer
Why on the one hand “not receive,” and on the other “therefore grasp”? The crux is the “merit is without reward” that Vasubandhu points out. When beings do merit, most secretly hope for a reward — and that very hope binds the merit within the tainted round of birth-and-death (Vasubandhu: 「取者，彼福德得有漏果報……如取非道故」— to grasp is for that merit to win a tainted reward… as one who grasps takes a wrong path, like leaving the right road to walk a perilous one). The bodhisattva’s “not grasping” is precisely the cutting of this hidden thread of “coveting reward”: merit does not summon a tainted reward, and so it is received without being bound to reward. Asaṅga assigns this layer to the “not abiding in the round of transmigration” within the Buddha-ground’s “not abiding in birth-and-death or nirvāṇa” — the accumulation of merit 「不應受、不應取」— should not be received, should not be grasped — not because merit is loathsome, but because the moment one receives or grasps a tainted reward, one falls back into transmigration. To receive its untainted, not coveting its tainted, is precisely the position of merit disclosed by the transformation of the basis (轉依, āśraya-parāvṛtti): casting off the defiled mind that covets the tainted, merit becomes the wisdom-provision oriented toward the supramundane (Vasubandhu: 「以能成就智慧莊嚴、功德莊嚴故」— because it can accomplish the adornment of wisdom and the adornment of merit).
Yogācāra as Mirror: One Reality, Said in the Sūtra’s Words and in the Treatise’s Words
To read this division with Yogācāra as a mirror is not to say that Yogācāra flows out of the Diamond Sūtra — the teachings of the two selflessnesses, the three natures, the three forbearances, and the transformation of the basis have their own scriptural source (the Saṃdhinirmocana, the Yogācārabhūmi) and treatises; the Prajñā corpus is another lineage. Rather, it is the very same reality — “no-self attaining forbearance · receiving but not grasping” — that the Diamond Sūtra states in the words of the sūtra (knowing all dharmas to be without self · not receiving merit) and Yogācāra states in the words of the treatise (the two selflessnesses · the three natures and three non-natures · severing the cognitive hindrance · the transformation of the basis with nothing attained); set side by side, the meaning shows the more clearly. The Thirty Verses dispel the two graspings by the two emptinesses and come to rest in the transformation of the basis, speaking of “nothing attained,” sealing with this division’s “knowing all dharmas to be without self · attaining forbearance” and “not receiving merit · receiving but not grasping.” The Cheng weishi lun speaks of severing the two hindrances, realizing the suchness of the two emptinesses, and dispelling the cognitive hindrance’s clinging-to-dharmas of “merit as a real attainment,” corresponding to Kuiji’s “penetrating the emptiness of the two selves, one thus attains forbearance.” The Madhyānta-vibhāga discerns the real, discerns the two emptinesses, and clarifies the latter half’s purifying of the cognitive hindrance through the emptiness of dharmas — the treatise-counterpart to this division’s “two selflessnesses · forbearance of the non-arising of dharmas.” The Twenty Verses break real dharmas outside the mind, of one vein with this division’s “knowing all dharmas to be without self” dispelling the clinging-to-dharmas. And in the Prajñā lineage, the Heart Sūtra’s 「以無所得故」「無智亦無得」— because of nothing attained · no wisdom and no attainment — is precisely the same no-attainment dharma-position as this division’s “not receiving merit · receiving but not grasping · no real attainment.” To close in a line: what the Diamond Sūtra states in the sūtra’s words as 「知一切法無我，得成於忍」「不受福德」— knowing all dharmas to be without self, accomplishing forbearance · not receiving merit — and what the Cheng weishi lun states in the technical words of “the suchness of the two emptinesses · the forbearance of the non-arising of dharmas · severing the cognitive hindrance · the untainted provision · the transformation of the basis with nothing attained” are one and the same matter 〔“not receiving, not grasping” is the transformation-of-the-basis, no-attainment meaning of “one should give rise to a mind that abides nowhere” (S5-P06)〕.
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 28 · Not Receiving, Not Grasping · exposition · Spring 2026
考據Apparatus
一、科判定位（無我忍·不受福德 · §17 後半 · 心具足不住流轉 · 加重）
| 科判系統 | 此分之位 |
|---|---|
| 昭明 32分 | 分二十八 不受不貪分 |
| 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「達一切法無我而得忍·福德受而不取」，所達者乃二無我·人法二空） |
| 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·第五「不住生死涅槃」——「為不住流轉故，經言『須菩提！菩薩於福聚，不應受，不應取』如是等。受者，說有故。取者，取彼道故」[0758a26–28]（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]；不住生死涅槃復有不住生死、不住涅槃二義 [0758a24–27]） |
| 世親 二十七疑 T1511/T1513 | 「得忍則失福德」之疑——「有人起如是心：『若不依福德得大菩提，如是諸菩薩摩訶薩則失福德及失果報。』自下經文為斷此疑」（T1511 [0795b08–10]）；義淨譯「若言福不證菩提者，此即菩薩福業其果應斷。為釋此疑，故有下文」（T1513 [0883b13–15]） |
| 吉藏（三論）T1699 | 承前破斷滅疑——「明菩薩得無生忍，得妙智慧妙福德，豈失福德因果墮斷滅中耶」[0122b26–28]；「今為格量菩薩無我忍也。此是人法無我，故名無我忍也」[0122c09–10] |
| 智顗（天台）T1698 | 「『若人滿恒沙七寶』下，結般若成忍。就文復三：初、明體道成忍之行無所有，次、明體道證忍之人無所有，三、明體道行忍之用無所有」[0083a21–24] |
| 窺基（唯識）T1700 | 依世親「此第三功德校量」[0152c10]、無著「此第二明不捨涅槃」[0152c12]（心具足第五·不住生死涅槃）；「謂因了達二我空故而得於忍，其福過彼所施功德也」[0152c15–16] |
無我忍·不受福德義：此分承樞紐（分十七 究竟無我·法空）後，以「知一切法無我，得成於忍」「以諸菩薩不受福德」「菩薩所作福德，不應貪著」顯二義之法空——「得忍」之忍緣「達一切法無我」（二無我·人法二空）而生（世親「有二種無我，不生二種無我相」T1511 [0795b24–25]、吉藏「人法無我，故名無我忍」[0122c09–10]、窺基「了達二我空故而得於忍」[0152c15]）；「不受福德」之受非無受，乃受其善而不取其執（世親「是福德無報，如是受不取」T1511 [0795b14]、窺基「不著自體等故，但希出世，故云不受也」[0152c23–24]）。古德三家俱判本分由樞紐後之法空續說（吉藏「菩薩無我忍·人法無我」、智顗「結般若成忍」、窺基「了達二我空」），且世親二譯論偈逕標「得勝忍不失，以得無垢果」（T1511 [0795b12]／T1513 [0883b17]「得忍亦不斷，以獲無垢故」）。窺基（依無著）判此分屬證道·心具足之不住生死涅槃（不住流轉），福聚「不應受、不應取」——即釋慧鏡 §17 二分「後半破法見·斷所知障」（二無我·法空）之古德所本（與樞紐分十七窺基「第二周為斷障，障即所知也」[0127c01–03] 一脈）。本分「即非」之施，於「福德」之受（受而不取）及「法」之無我（二我空·得忍），而非前半之「相·眾生」（見目三）。
二、異譯對勘（六漢譯 · 得忍·不受福德一段）
要句：知一切法無我·得成於忍（勝前布施福）/ 菩薩不受福德 / 菩薩所作福德不應貪著·是故說不受福德
| 版本 | 得忍·不受福德一段（逐字節錄） | [出處] |
|---|---|---|
| 羅什 T235（原典） | 「若復有人知一切法無我，得成於忍，此菩薩勝前菩薩所得功德。須菩提！以諸菩薩不受福德故。」須菩提白佛言：「世尊！云何菩薩不受福德？」「須菩提！菩薩所作福德，不應貪著，是故說不受福德。」 | 0752a26–b02 |
| 菩提流支 T236a | 「若有菩薩，知一切法無我，得無生法忍。此功德勝前所得福德。須菩提！以諸菩薩不取福德故。」須菩提白佛言：「世尊！菩薩不取福德？」佛言：「須菩提！菩薩受福德，不取福德，是故菩薩取福德。」 | 0756c03–c07 |
| 真諦 T237 | 「若有菩薩，於一切法無我、無生，得無生忍，以是因緣，所得福德最多於彼。須菩提！行大乘人，不應執取福德之聚。」須菩提言：「此福德聚，可攝持不？」佛言：「須菩提！此福德聚，可得攝持，不可執取。是故說此福德之聚，應可攝持。」 | 0766a16–a21 |
| 達摩笈多 T238 | 「若菩薩摩訶薩無我、無生中，法中忍得。此如是，彼緣，多過福聚生。不，復，善實！菩薩福聚取應。」命者善實言：「不，世尊！菩薩福聚取應？」世尊言：「取應，善實！不取應，彼故說名取應。」 | 0771b06–b10 |
| 玄奘 T220⑨ | 「若有菩薩於諸無我無生法中獲得堪忍，由是因緣所生福聚甚多於彼。復次，善現！菩薩不應攝受福聚。」具壽善現即白佛言：「世尊！云何菩薩不應攝受福聚？」佛言：「善現！所應攝受不應攝受，是故說名所應攝受。」 | 0985b05–b12 |
| 義淨 T239 | 「若復有人，於無我理、不生法中，得忍解者，所生福聚，極多於彼無量無數。妙生！菩薩不應取其福聚。」妙生言：「菩薩豈不取福聚耶？」佛告妙生：「是應正取，不應越取，是故說取。」 | 0775a20–a25 |
異文所繫：
- 「得成於忍」之忍名：羅什作「得成於忍」（忍名渾然不標）；流支作「得無生法忍」、真諦作「得無生忍」（並益「無生」二字）；玄奘作「獲得堪忍」、義淨作「得忍解」、笈多作「忍得」。諸本所成之忍，古德判為「無生法忍」（吉藏逕釋羅什「得成於忍」為「得無生忍」
[0122b26–29]、窺基「得成忍者，忍有三種……本性無生·自然無生·惑苦無生」[0152c16–20]）。 - 「知一切法無我」之所達：羅什、流支、玄奘作「知一切法無我／無我無生法」；真諦作「於一切法無我、無生」、笈多作「無我、無生中」、義淨作「於無我理、不生法中」——真諦、笈多、義淨三本明標無我＋無生（不生）二義。古德判此「無我」為人法二無我（二空）：世親「有二種無我，不生二種無我相」
T1511 [0795b24–25]、義淨論「於不生法得無性者，有二種無性，由其二性體不生故」T1513 [0883b24–26]、吉藏「此是人法無我，故名無我忍」[0122c09–10]、窺基「了達二我空故而得於忍」[0152c15]。此「二無我」正是 §17 樞紐「通達無我、法」之續（見目三）。 - 「不受福德／不取福德」之三句結構：羅什作二問答（「不受福德」→「云何不受」→「不應貪著，是故說不受福德」），即非式之第三句（是名）以「不應貪著」釋之；流支作三句「菩薩受福德，不取福德，是故菩薩取福德」
[0756c06–07]（受·不取·取）；笈多作「取應……不取應，彼故說名取應」[0771b10]、玄奘作「所應攝受……不應攝受，是故說名所應攝受」[0985b11–12]——能斷三系（流支·笈多·玄奘）俱具「受／不取／是故取」之三句式（即非式施於福德之受：受其善·遣其執·立其假）。真諦獨作「可得攝持，不可執取……應可攝持」[0766a20–21]（攝持／不執取／應可攝持），詞異而三句之構同。羅什、義淨則收於「不應貪著／是故說不受」（羅什）·「是應正取，不應越取，是故說取」（義淨）——以「不貪著／不越取」釋「不受」之義。 - 能斷系重詞·三句：流支「菩薩受福德，不取福德，是故菩薩取福德」、笈多「取應……不取應，彼故說名取應」、玄奘「所應攝受不應攝受，是故說名所應攝受」——三句之「受／取／攝受」同名三舉，即非式作「受 X·非取 X·是故名取 X」；逐字錄之，不縮。世親流支論逕牒此三句「菩薩受福德，不取福德，是故菩薩取福德」
T1511 [0795b25–26]為論本所釋（見目四）。 - 真諦「攝持／執取」之別立：真諦不作「受／取」而作「攝持／執取」
[0766a20–21]——「可得攝持」（受其福·世諦可說）·「不可執取」（不執為實有所得）；以「攝持／執取」分疏「受／不取」，於六本中詞獨異而義同（受而不著）。
三、即非・三性（眼 · 福德受而不取·法空二無我 · §17 後半 · 加重）
本分「即非」之施有二：其一施於「法」——「知一切法無我，得成於忍」[0752a26–27]，所達者人法二無我（二空·法空），即非前半之「我空·破四相」而後半之「法空·破四見」；其二施於「福德」之受——能斷系「受福德·不取福德·是故取福德」[流支 0756c06–07]，即非式施於福德（受其善·遣其執·立其假）。所「得忍」與「不受」者，皆繫於法我之遣（執法為實·執福為實得），非前半之我執。
★ 後半繫定：本分居 §17 樞紐之後（後半 分十七–卅二）。前半（分一–十六）之即非多施於「相·眾生·福德」之外境、所對治者煩惱障（破四相·我空）；至此分（後半·法空），即非施於「一切法無我」（二無我·得忍）與「福德之受」（受而不取）——破「法為實有·福為實得」之法執（法我），所對治者所知障（破四見）。樞紐分十七「通達無我、法」[0751b12]（人我·法我二空·窺基「達我、法空，證無我理」[0147b09–10]）已開法空之門；本分「知一切法無我，得成於忍」即其續行——世親逕釋「知一切法無我得無生法忍者，有二種無我，不生二種無我相」T1511 [0795b23–25]、義淨論「於不生法得無性者，有二種無性，由其二性體不生故」T1513 [0883b24–26]、窺基「了達二我空故而得於忍」[0152c15]，皆以「二無我·二空」釋此忍。此「我空→法空·煩惱障→所知障·第二周斷所知障」之轉，古德所本即在分十七窺基（依世親）「第二周為斷障，障即所知也」[0127c01–03]、窺基（依無著）「為二種無我故……二種正覺」[0147b26–27]（見分十七目四）。
其一·「一切法無我 — 得成於忍」映三性（法空位）： 窺基逕以三忍配三性——「得成忍者，忍有三種：一者、本性無生忍，謂觀遍計所執人、法二相本無體故；二者、自然無生忍，觀依他假因緣非自然生故；三者、惑苦無生忍，觀於真如惑苦本不生故」[0152c16–20]：
- 本性無生忍——觀遍計所執人法二相本無體（即非·遣遍計：所執之實我實法本空）。
- 自然無生忍——觀依他假因緣非自然生（依他起·緣生無自性）。
- 惑苦無生忍——觀真如惑苦本不生（圓成實·真如所顯）。
此即非映三性之讀，於本分由窺基「三忍」逕示三性（遍計·依他·圓成），見釋慧鏡《即非三段式映射唯識三性》〔摘自 S5-P01〕；本分為其於「無我得忍·法空」位之一施。
其二·「受福德 — 不取福德 — 是故取福德」（能斷系三句）映三性（福德之受）：
- 受福德（X）即依他起——緣修善行所生、世諦可說可受之福德（窺基「菩薩所行福德」
[0152c23]；真諦「可得攝持」[0766a20]）。福德非無，故「受」、故「是故取」。 - 不取福德即遣遍計所執——非分別所執之「實有所得·有漏果報之福」（世親「取者，彼福德得有漏果報……如取非道故」
T1511 [0795b28–c01]；窺基「不著自體等故，但希出世，故云不受也」[0152c23–24]；真諦「不可執取」[0766a21]）。「不取」者，遣「福為實得·貪著有漏報」之執，非謂無福。 - 是故取福德／是故說不受即立圓成（亦兼世諦可說）——無實得而真如所攝之無漏福（世親「是福德無報，如是受不取……無彼有漏報，是故此福德受而不取」
T1511 [0795b14·c01–02]；羅什「不應貪著，是故說不受福德」[0752b01–02]；義淨論「彼福無報故，正取非越取」T1513 [0883b27]）。受其善而不貪其報，正圓成之立——窺基「以不貪著自體等而行福德，故名為不受也」[0152c28–29]。
本分之眼（★後半·法空）：即非一式，至此分施於「一切法無我·得忍」（二無我·二空）與「福德之受」（受而不取）——非前半（分一至十六）施於「相·眾生·福德多寡」之外境（人我·破四相·煩惱障），乃後半（分十七至卅二）施於「法為實·福為實得」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「通達無我、法」（人法二空），本分二十八進以「知一切法無我，得成於忍」落其忍位、以「不受福德」落其受位——世親「不失功德因·得勝忍不失·是福德無報·如是受不取」T1511 [0795b11–14]、窺基「了達二我空故而得於忍·不著自體等故云不受」[0152c15·c23–24]，皆「遣法執（即非·不取）而存可受（是名·受其善）」。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「無我得忍·福德受而不取·法空」位之一施。「不受不貪」（受其善而不貪其報·無得之福）即三十頌「轉依·無得」之經語對應〔摘自 S5-P06〕（見目七）。
四、諸家異釋（古德 · 得忍二無我·不失福德·受而不取 · 加重）
核心 加重 ——世親《金剛般若論》偈（不失功德因·得勝忍不失·是福德無報如是受不取），二漢譯並存： 世親以「破得忍則失福德之疑」立本分，偈「不失功德因，及彼勝果報；得勝忍不失，以得無垢果」釋「得忍勝前布施福」，偈「是福德無報，如是受不取」釋「受福德·不取福德」，逐項錨於經文；二譯名異義一。
世親 T1511（菩提流支譯）：先牒經（流支經「菩薩受福德，不取福德，是故菩薩取福德」[0795b06]），次設疑——「有人起如是心：『若不依福德得大菩提，如是諸菩薩摩訶薩則失福德及失果報。』自下經文為斷此疑」[0795b08–10]。論偈 [0795b11–14]：
「不失功德因，及彼勝果報；得勝忍不失，以得無垢果。 示勝福德相，是故說譬喻；是福德無報，如是受不取。」
- 釋「得忍不失福德」：「雖不依福德得真菩提，而不失福德及彼果報。何以故？以能成就智慧莊嚴、功德莊嚴故」
[0795b15–17]；「有人起如是心：『諸菩薩摩訶薩得無生法忍，以得出世間智，失彼福德及以果報。』為遮此故，示現福德不失，而更得清淨殊勝功德，是故不失」[0795b18–21]。 - 釋「知一切法無我得無生法忍」（二無我）：「若復有菩薩知一切法無我得無生法忍者，有二種無我，不生二種無我相，是故受而不取」
[0795b23–25]。 - 釋「受福德·不取福德」（受而不取·福德無報）：「云何菩薩受福德不取福德？偈言『是福德無報』，如是受不取故。此義云何？取者，彼福德得有漏果報。以有漏果報故，彼福德可訶……如是取者名之為取，如取非道故。『此福德無報』，無報者，無彼有漏報，是故此福德受而不取」
[0795b27–c02]。
世親 T1513（義淨譯）：先設疑——「若言福不證菩提者，此即菩薩福業其果應斷。為釋此疑，故有下文，言此福性雖復不能親招覺處」[0883b13–15]。頌 [0883b16–19]：
「其福不失亡，果報不斷絕，得忍亦不斷，以獲無垢故。 更論於福因，為此陳其喻，彼福無報故，正取非越取。」
- 「由此是彼智資糧性故」
[0883b20]；「又有疑云：『既得無生法忍智乃不生，菩薩諸福皆應斷絕。』為顯福不斷絕至極清淨，獲福既多果報亦勝，於不生法得無性者有二種無性，由其二性體不生故」[0883b22–26]；釋「正取／越取」：「凡所有福招果報者，是可厭故，當知彼取即是越取，如越正路而行嶮道。而彼福不招報，是故彼是正取非為越取」[0883b27–c01]。
〔二譯對位：不失功德因·及彼勝果報／其福不失亡·果報不斷絕（不失福德）· 得勝忍不失·以得無垢果／得忍亦不斷·以獲無垢故（得忍不失·無垢）· 是福德無報·如是受不取／彼福無報故·正取非越取（福無有漏報·受而不取／正取非越取）——同一世親論之二漢譯，名異義一。二譯俱以「二無我／二無性」（T1511 [0795b24]／T1513 [0883b25]）釋「得忍」，俱以「福德無有漏報故受而不取（正取非越取）」釋「不受福德」。〕
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·第五「不住生死涅槃」——「為不住涅槃故，經言『須菩提！如是念：「發行菩薩乘者，有法說斷滅」耶』如是等。為不住流轉故，經言『須菩提！菩薩於福聚，不應受，不應取』如是等。受者，說有故。取者，取彼道故。如福聚及果中，皆不應者」[0758a24–29]。〔無著此段止安立經文之住處對位（不住涅槃＝不說斷滅·分二十七；不住流轉＝福聚不應受不應取·本分二十八；「受者說有·取者取彼道」釋「受／取」之別）；其「得忍二無我·福德受而不取」之展開，世親釋、窺基引足之，見上世親條、下窺基條。〕
吉藏（三論）T1699：承前破斷滅疑而來——「明菩薩得無生忍，得妙智慧妙福德，豈失福德因果墮斷滅中耶」[0122b26–28]；釋「發菩提心」與「得無生忍」之關：「初得無生忍，亦名初發心也……初後不二，如云『發心、畢竟二不別』也」[0122b29–c02]。釋「滿恒沙七寶布施」之重格量：「前為格量持經四句，今為格量菩薩無我忍也。此是人法無我，故名無我忍也」[0122c08–10]。釋「不受福德」：「『不受福德』者，不受有所得福德故，此菩薩勝前菩薩，前菩薩受有得福德故不及後菩薩也」[0122c10–12]；問答料簡「不受／不貪」：「問：菩薩既作福德，云何不貪著耶？答：菩薩以無受心作故不生貪心，多非作福德，然復不貪也」[0122c12–14]。
智顗（天台）T1698：科為「『若人滿恒沙七寶』下，結般若成忍」[0083a21–22]，就文復三——「初、明體道成忍之行無所有，次、明體道證忍之人無所有，三、明體道行忍之用無所有，以行成人、人故有用，備明無所有」[0083a22–25]。釋成忍之行：「次『若復有人』下，明成忍之行無所有，忘我則忍成，超出故勝也」[0083a25–27]。釋證忍之人（因人不受）：「『白佛』下，第二明體道證忍之人無所有，初、明因人不受，後、明果人不受。初、明因中有問答，乃云不受亦不受，受其報種已名貪著，無存我、人，邪染何生」[0083a27–b01]。
窺基（唯識）T1700：依世親「此第三功德校量」[0152c10]、無著「此第二明不捨涅槃」（心具足第五·不住生死涅槃）[0152c12]。釋「得成於忍」（二我空·三忍配三性）：「謂因了達二我空故而得於忍，其福過彼所施功德也。得成忍者，忍有三種：一者、本性無生忍，謂觀遍計所執人、法二相本無體故；二者、自然無生忍，觀依他假因緣非自然生故；三者、惑苦無生忍，觀於真如惑苦本不生故」[0152c15–20]。釋「不受福德」（不著自體·但希出世）：「『不受福德故』者，謂菩薩所行福德，不著自體等故，但希出世，故云不受也」[0152c23–24]；釋佛答「不應貪著」：「述曰，此第三佛答也。以不貪著自體等而行福德，故名為不受也」[0152c28–29]。
古德三家異流（三論·天台·唯識）於本分同歸世親偈：得忍＝知一切法無我之無生法忍（達二無我·人法二空，乃名無我忍）；不受福德＝受而不取（受其善·不貪有漏報·無實得）。吉藏「人法無我故名無我忍·無受心作故不貪」、智顗「忘我則忍成·不受亦不受·受其報種已名貪著」、窺基（依世親無著）「了達二我空故得忍·三忍配遍計依他真如·不著自體但希出世故云不受」——逐項錨於「知一切法無我·得成於忍·不受福德·不應貪著」。此即本分「無我忍·不受不貪」之古德定讀，亦§17 後半「斷所知障·破法見」（二無我·法空）之經文所本。
五、術語
無生法忍／得成於忍 anutpattika-dharma-kṣānti（達一切法無我·不生而起之忍；羅什「得成於忍」·流支「無生法忍」·真諦「無生忍」·玄奘「堪忍」·義淨「忍解」之譯異見目二；窺基三忍「本性無生·自然無生·惑苦無生」[0152c16–20]）·
二無我／二我空（人無我 pudgala-nairātmya ＋ 法無我 dharma-nairātmya；世親「有二種無我，不生二種無我相」T1511 [0795b24–25]、義淨論「二種無性，由其二性體不生故」T1513 [0883b25–26]、吉藏「人法無我，故名無我忍」[0122c09–10]、窺基「了達二我空故而得於忍」[0152c15]）·
不受福德／不取福德 na ... puṇya-skandhaṃ parigṛhṇāti（受而不取·受其善而不貪有漏報；羅什·義淨「不受／不應貪著／正取非越取」·流支「受福德不取福德是故取福德」·真諦「攝持／不執取」·玄奘「所應攝受不應攝受」·笈多「取應不取應」之譯異見目二）·
不應貪著 na ... abhiniviśate（羅什「菩薩所作福德，不應貪著，是故說不受福德」[0752b01–02]；窺基「以不貪著自體等而行福德，故名為不受也」[0152c28–29]；吉藏「無受心作故不生貪心……然復不貪」[0122c13–14]）·
有漏果報（福德無報之所遣；世親「取者，彼福德得有漏果報……此福德無報，無彼有漏報，是故此福德受而不取」T1511 [0795b28–c02]）·
無垢果（得勝忍所獲；世親偈「得勝忍不失，以得無垢果」T1511 [0795b12]／義淨「得忍亦不斷，以獲無垢故」T1513 [0883b17]）·
不住生死涅槃／不住流轉（佛地心具足第五；無著「為不住流轉故，經言『菩薩於福聚，不應受，不應取』」T1510a [0758a26–27]）。〔梵文發音輔助；「得成於忍／不受福德」之譯異見目二。〕
六、譬喻・修辭（不受不貪 · 校量之反顯與受而不取之翻轉）
本分無具象譬喻（虛空喻在分四·須彌喻在分十·十七·忍辱仙人喻在分十四·色見聲求偈在分二十六·六喻在分三十二）。修辭之要在福德較量之反顯與「受／不受」之翻轉：
- 福德較量之反顯：本分以「滿恒河沙等世界七寶布施」之福，反顯「知一切法無我，得成於忍」之福勝（羅什「此菩薩勝前菩薩所得功德」
[0752a27–28]）——以巨量財施之福為陪襯，反顯無我得忍之福逾於布施。此「福德較量」與分八（七寶對四句偈）、分十一（恒沙對持經）、分十九（七寶對福德即非）同構，皆「以福反顯」之筆（智顗「以無福為福，故多也」[0082b17–18]）。本分之較量獨在「無我忍」一邊（非持經），故吉藏「今為格量菩薩無我忍也」[0122c08–09]。 - 「受／不受」之翻轉（即非式施於福德）：正言「諸菩薩不受福德」（似全遮福），陡以問答翻轉——「云何不受？」「菩薩所作福德，不應貪著，是故說不受」（羅什
[0752a29–b02]）：非無福德，乃受其善而不貪其報。能斷系尤顯三句之翻轉：「菩薩受福德，不取福德，是故菩薩取福德」（流支[0756c06–07]）——受（依他可受）·不取（遣遍計實得）·取（是名·世諦無漏福），一句之中三轉。智顗「乃云不受亦不受，受其報種已名貪著」[0083a29–b01]、世親「是福德無報，如是受不取」T1511 [0795b14]，皆顯此「受而不取·無報之福」之雙義。 - 「得忍」之忘我：智顗「忘我則忍成，超出故勝也」
[0083a26–27]——成忍之行在「忘我」（達無我），忍由我空·法空（二無我）而成，非強忍可至。此「忘我成忍」之筆，與分十四「無我相·無人相」之忍辱（離相寂滅）同軌，而本分進於「法無我」（一切法無我）。此目於本分（福德較量之反顯·受不取之三句翻轉·忘我成忍）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·無得（v.29 圓成實·轉依）——本分「知一切法無我·得成於忍」即三十頌「二無我·二空所顯轉依」之經語對應（無生法忍緣二無我而成）；「不受福德·受而不取」即「無得·無所貪著」之福位。
- 成唯識論（T1585）：二障·二執（所知障所執之法我）·無漏福——本分「了達二我空故而得於忍」〔窺基語見目四〕即成唯識「斷二障·證二空真如」之經語對應；「福德無有漏報·受而不取」即遣所知障所執「福為實得·有漏果報」之法執，存無漏資糧。
- 辯中邊論（T1600）：辯真實品·二空·無得（後半法空·所知障淨）——本分「二無我·無生法忍」之論本對應。
- 二十論（T1590）：唯識無境·遣所執實法——「知一切法無我」即遣「法」為心外實有之執，與二十論破實境一脈（法空·遣遍計實法）。
- 百法（T1614）：六無為之「真如」·無生（窺基三忍之「惑苦無生忍，觀於真如惑苦本不生」
〔見目四〕）——本分「真如·無生」之名相對應。 - 心經（T251）：「以無所得故」「無智亦無得」——本分「不受福德·受而不取·無實得」即心經「無所得」之福位（福德無實得而無漏宛然）。
本分「知一切法無我·得成於忍·不受福德」，即三十頌·成唯識論「二無我·二空·轉依·無得·斷所知障」之經語對應；「不受福德·受而不取」即心經「以無所得故·無智亦無得」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「知一切法無我，得成於忍」「不受福德」一語，成唯識論以「二空真如·無生法忍·斷所知障·無漏資糧」之技術語說同一事。「不受不貪」即「應無所住而生其心」之轉依·無得義〔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；古德引據見目四，互讀不重出引文。〕
八、東西對觀（西方視角 · 對觀，非裁奪）
- 「不受福德·受而不取·不應貪著」之無所求行 ↔ 西方倫理學之「無私／非功利之善」（康德「為義務而義務·不為傾向或報償」之善意志；亞里斯多德之「為其自身而行善」）：西方多就動機之純粹立論（行善不為報償·去除自利動機）；古德／唯識讀「不受福德」非僅動機之純，乃遣所知障所執「福為實得·有漏果報」之法執（世親「取者，彼福德得有漏果報……此福德無報」
T1511 [0795b28–c02]、窺基「不著自體等故，但希出世」[0152c23–24]），是斷障·轉無漏所顯之圓成——「不取」之後有「是故取」（受其善·無漏福宛然），非純去動機之倫理命題。 - 「知一切法無我·得成於忍」之無我 ↔ 西方之「無我說／自我之解構」（休謨束論之無我·推及無物；後現代主體之消解）：西方多就自我（主體）之不可立立論；古德以「二無我·人法二空」（世親「有二種無我」
T1511 [0795b24]、窺基「了達二我空」[0152c15]）言之——不止人無我（主體空），兼法無我（一切法空），且「無我」之後有「得忍」（無生法忍·真如所顯），是斷二障·轉依所證之圓成，非僅主體之解構或心理之無我感。 - 「福德無報·正取非越取」之非斷非著 ↔ 西方之「行動而不執著結果」（或斯多噶之「行其所當·不繫於果」）：可對觀；然唯識「受而不取」非僅心態之不繫於果，乃福德無有漏報故受之為無漏資糧（義淨論「彼福無報故，正取非越取」
T1513 [0883b27]、世親「無彼有漏報，是故此福德受而不取」T1511 [0795c01–02]）——「正取」（受其無漏·智資糧）與「越取」（貪有漏報·如越正路行嶮道）之別，是有所斷·有所顯之修證，非籠統之不執著。 - 對觀之要：西方傾向以「不受福德·無我」為純粹動機·主體解構·不執結果之命題（善何以須無私·自我何以不可立·如何行而不著）；古德以「二無我得忍·福德受而不取」為達二空·得無生忍·遣法執·轉無漏資糧·斷所知障之修證（所遣者法我·有漏報之執，不受正為斷障所顯之無漏福）。動機·解構之命題與斷障·轉依之修證，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 [0752a25–b02]（原典 · 不受不貪分）。六譯本得忍·不受福德一段 [出處] 見目二：流支 T0236a [0756c02–c07] · 真諦 T0237 [0766a15–a21] · 笈多 T0238 [0771b05–b10] · 玄奘 T220⑨ [0985b05–b12] · 義淨 T0239 [0775a20–a25]。 科判／論本：無著 T1510a [0757c28–0758a02·0758a24–a29·0758c03–04] · 世親 T1511 [0795b08–0795c02]（偈 [0795b11–b14]）· 世親 T1513 [0883b13–0883c01]（頌 [0883b16–b19]）。 古德：吉藏 T1699 [0122b25–0122c14] · 智顗 T1698 [0083a21–0083b01] · 窺基 T1700 [0152c08–0152c29]。
1 · Placement in the Sectioning Schemes (the patience of no-self · not receiving merit · §17 second half · the mind-attainment’s “not abiding in flux” · emphasized)
| Sectioning scheme | Placement of this division |
|---|---|
| Zhaoming 32 divisions | Division 28, Not Receiving, Not Grasping (不受不貪分) |
| Shi Huijing §17 two-part | Second half (emptiness-of-dharmas · breaking the four views · the cognitive hindrance; after the pivot, division 17, at the station of emptiness-of-dharmas: “penetrating all dharmas without self and attaining patience · receiving merit without grasping,” what is reached being the two no-selves, the two emptinesses of person and dharma) |
| Dao’an’s three-part schema | Main-teaching division · second round · the Buddha-stage attainment of the path-of-witness |
| Asaṅga’s eighteen abodes, T1510 | Within the seventeenth abode, the path-of-witness (the abode of the purified mind, [0758c03–04]), among the six attainments of the Buddha-stage that subsume the transformation-of-the-basis: the mind-attainment · fifth item, “not abiding in birth-death or nirvāṇa” — 「為不住流轉故，經言『須菩提！菩薩於福聚，不應受，不應取』如是等。受者，說有故。取者，取彼道故」[0758a26–28] (the mind-attainment subsumes the stations of mindfulness · right awakening · setting forth the great-benefit Dharma · taking up the Dharma-body · not abiding in birth-death or nirvāṇa · the purity of conduct-and-dwelling [0757c29–0758a02]; “not abiding in birth-death or nirvāṇa” further has the two senses of not-abiding-in-birth-death and not-abiding-in-nirvāṇa [0758a24–27]) |
| Vasubandhu’s twenty-seven doubts, T1511/T1513 | The doubt “if one attains patience one loses merit” — 「有人起如是心：『若不依福德得大菩提，如是諸菩薩摩訶薩則失福德及失果報。』自下經文為斷此疑」(T1511 [0795b08–10]); Yijing’s rendering 「若言福不證菩提者，此即菩薩福業其果應斷。為釋此疑，故有下文」(T1513 [0883b13–15]) |
| Jizang (Three-Treatise) T1699 | Following on from the breaking of the doubt of annihilation — 「明菩薩得無生忍，得妙智慧妙福德，豈失福德因果墮斷滅中耶」[0122b26–28]; 「今為格量菩薩無我忍也。此是人法無我，故名無我忍也」[0122c09–10] |
| Zhiyi (Tiantai) T1698 | 「『若人滿恒沙七寶』下，結般若成忍。就文復三：初、明體道成忍之行無所有，次、明體道證忍之人無所有，三、明體道行忍之用無所有」[0083a21–24] |
| Kuiji (Yogācāra) T1700 | After Vasubandhu 「此第三功德校量」[0152c10] and Asaṅga 「此第二明不捨涅槃」[0152c12] (mind-attainment’s fifth · not abiding in birth-death or nirvāṇa); 「謂因了達二我空故而得於忍，其福過彼所施功德也」[0152c15–16] |
Sense of “the patience of no-self · not receiving merit”: this division follows the pivot (division 17, Ultimate No-Self · emptiness-of-dharmas) and, with 「知一切法無我，得成於忍」「以諸菩薩不受福德」「菩薩所作福德，不應貪著」, displays a two-fold emptiness-of-dharmas — the “patience attained” is born conditioned on penetrating “all dharmas without self” (the two no-selves · the two emptinesses of person and dharma: Vasubandhu 「有二種無我，不生二種無我相」T1511 [0795b24–25], Jizang 「人法無我，故名無我忍」[0122c09–10], Kuiji 「了達二我空故而得於忍」[0152c15]); and the “not receiving merit” is not no-receiving but receiving its good while not grasping its clinging (Vasubandhu 「是福德無報，如是受不取」T1511 [0795b14], Kuiji 「不著自體等故，但希出世，故云不受也」[0152c23–24]). The three ancient masters all judge this division to continue from the post-pivot emptiness-of-dharmas (Jizang’s “bodhisattva’s patience of no-self · the no-self of person and dharma,” Zhiyi’s “consummating prajñā into patience,” Kuiji’s “penetrating the emptiness of the two selves”), and the two renderings of Vasubandhu’s treatise-verse expressly mark 「得勝忍不失，以得無垢果」(T1511 [0795b12] / T1513 [0883b17]「得忍亦不斷，以獲無垢故」). Kuiji (after Asaṅga) judges this division to belong to the path-of-witness · the mind-attainment’s not abiding in birth-death or nirvāṇa (not abiding in flux), the merit-mass “not to be received, not to be grasped” — the ancient-master ground of Shi Huijing’s §17 two-part “second half breaking the view of dharmas · cutting the cognitive hindrance” (the two no-selves · emptiness-of-dharmas), of one lineage with the pivot-division 17’s Kuiji 「第二周為斷障，障即所知也」[0127c01–03]. The “is-not” of this division is applied to the receiving of “merit” (receiving without grasping) and the no-self of “dharmas” (the emptiness of the two selves · attaining patience), not to the first half’s “marks · sentient beings” (see register 3).
2 · Collation of the Variant Translations (six Chinese versions · the passage on attaining patience and not receiving merit)
Key passage: knowing all dharmas without self · attaining realization in patience (a merit surpassing the prior giving) / the bodhisattva does not receive merit / the merit a bodhisattva works is not to be coveted · therefore it is said they do not receive merit
| Version | Passage on attaining patience and not receiving merit (verbatim excerpt) | [loc] |
|---|---|---|
| Kumārajīva T235 (root) | 「若復有人知一切法無我，得成於忍，此菩薩勝前菩薩所得功德。須菩提！以諸菩薩不受福德故。」須菩提白佛言：「世尊！云何菩薩不受福德？」「須菩提！菩薩所作福德，不應貪著，是故說不受福德。」 | 0752a26–b02 |
| Bodhiruci T236a | 「若有菩薩，知一切法無我，得無生法忍。此功德勝前所得福德。須菩提！以諸菩薩不取福德故。」須菩提白佛言：「世尊！菩薩不取福德？」佛言：「須菩提！菩薩受福德，不取福德，是故菩薩取福德。」 | 0756c03–c07 |
| Paramārtha T237 | 「若有菩薩，於一切法無我、無生，得無生忍，以是因緣，所得福德最多於彼。須菩提！行大乘人，不應執取福德之聚。」須菩提言：「此福德聚，可攝持不？」佛言：「須菩提！此福德聚，可得攝持，不可執取。是故說此福德之聚，應可攝持。」 | 0766a16–a21 |
| Dharmagupta T238 | 「若菩薩摩訶薩無我、無生中，法中忍得。此如是，彼緣，多過福聚生。不，復，善實！菩薩福聚取應。」命者善實言：「不，世尊！菩薩福聚取應？」世尊言：「取應，善實！不取應，彼故說名取應。」 | 0771b06–b10 |
| Xuanzang T220⑨ | 「若有菩薩於諸無我無生法中獲得堪忍，由是因緣所生福聚甚多於彼。復次，善現！菩薩不應攝受福聚。」具壽善現即白佛言：「世尊！云何菩薩不應攝受福聚？」佛言：「善現！所應攝受不應攝受，是故說名所應攝受。」 | 0985b05–b12 |
| Yijing T239 | 「若復有人，於無我理、不生法中，得忍解者，所生福聚，極多於彼無量無數。妙生！菩薩不應取其福聚。」妙生言：「菩薩豈不取福聚耶？」佛告妙生：「是應正取，不應越取，是故說取。」 | 0775a20–a25 |
What the variants turn on:
- The name of “the patience attained”: Kumārajīva has 「得成於忍」 (the name of the patience left whole, unmarked); Bodhiruci has 得「無生法忍」, Paramārtha 得「無生忍」 (both adding the two words “no-arising”); Xuanzang has 獲得「堪忍」, Yijing 得「忍解」, Dharmagupta 「忍得」. The patience these versions truly-perfected is judged by the ancient masters to be the “patience of the no-arising of dharmas” (anutpattika-dharma-kṣānti) (Jizang directly glosses Kumārajīva’s 「得成於忍」 as 「得無生忍」
[0122b26–29]; Kuiji 「得成忍者，忍有三種……本性無生·自然無生·惑苦無生」[0152c16–20]). - What “knowing all dharmas without self” reaches: Kumārajīva, Bodhiruci, Xuanzang have 知「一切法無我／無我無生法」; Paramārtha 「於一切法無我、無生」, Dharmagupta 「無我、無生中」, Yijing 「於無我理、不生法中」 — three versions (Paramārtha, Dharmagupta, Yijing) expressly mark the two senses of no-self and no-arising (non-arising). The ancient masters judge this “no-self” to be the two no-selves of person and dharma (the two emptinesses): Vasubandhu 「有二種無我，不生二種無我相」
T1511 [0795b24–25], the Yijing treatise 「於不生法得無性者，有二種無性，由其二性體不生故」T1513 [0883b24–26], Jizang 「此是人法無我，故名無我忍」[0122c09–10], Kuiji 「了達二我空故而得於忍」[0152c15]. This “two no-selves” is precisely the continuation of §17’s pivot, “penetrating no-self and dharmas” (see register 3). - The three-clause structure of “not receiving merit / not grasping merit”: Kumārajīva gives two question-answers (「不受福德」→「云何不受」→「不應貪著，是故說不受福德」), the third clause (“is-called”) of the “is-not” form glossed by 「不應貪著」; Bodhiruci gives three clauses 「菩薩受福德，不取福德，是故菩薩取福德」
[0756c06–07](receive · not grasp · grasp); Dharmagupta 「取應……不取應，彼故說名取應」[0771b10], Xuanzang 「所應攝受……不應攝受，是故說名所應攝受」[0985b11–12]— the three Able-to-Cut versions (Bodhiruci · Dharmagupta · Xuanzang) all carry the three-clause form “receive / not grasp / therefore grasp” (the “is-not” applied to the receiving of merit: receive its good · remove the clinging · set up the conventional). Paramārtha alone gives 「可得攝持，不可執取……應可攝持」[0766a20–21](can be held / cannot be clung to / can be held) — the wording differs but the three-clause structure is the same. Kumārajīva and Yijing settle on 「不應貪著／是故說不受」 (Kumārajīva) and 「是應正取，不應越取，是故說取」 (Yijing) — glossing the sense of “not receiving” by “not coveting / not over-grasping.” - The Able-to-Cut repeated terms · three clauses: Bodhiruci 「菩薩受福德，不取福德，是故菩薩取福德」, Dharmagupta 「取應……不取應，彼故說名取應」, Xuanzang 「所應攝受不應攝受，是故說名所應攝受」 — the three clauses’ “receive / grasp / take-up” raise the same name three times, the “is-not” form running as “receive X · not grasp X · therefore named grasp X”; recorded verbatim, not abridged. Vasubandhu’s treatise in the Bodhiruci rendering directly cites these three clauses 「菩薩受福德，不取福德，是故菩薩取福德」
T1511 [0795b25–26]as what the treatise expounds (see register 4). - Paramārtha’s separate setting of “holding / clinging”: Paramārtha gives not “receive / grasp” but 「攝持／執取」
[0766a20–21]— 「可得攝持」 (receive its merit · conventionally sayable) · 「不可執取」 (not grasping it as a real attainment). By parsing “receive / not grasp” through “holding / clinging,” the wording stands alone among the six versions while the sense is one (receive without clinging).
3 · “Is-Not” and the Three Natures (the eye · the receiving of merit without grasping · the two no-selves of emptiness-of-dharmas · §17 second half · emphasized)
This division’s “is-not” is applied twice: first to “dharmas” — 「知一切法無我，得成於忍」[0752a26–27], what is reached being the two no-selves of person and dharma (the two emptinesses · emptiness-of-dharmas), the “is-not” no longer of the first half’s “emptiness-of-self · breaking the four marks” but of the second half’s “emptiness-of-dharmas · breaking the four views”; second to the receiving of “merit” — the Able-to-Cut versions’ 「受福德·不取福德·是故取福德」[Bodhiruci 0756c06–07], the “is-not” form applied to merit (receive its good · remove the clinging · set up the conventional). What the “patience attained” and the “not receiving” both bind to is the removal of the dharma-self (clinging to dharmas as real · clinging to merit as a real attainment), not the first half’s self-clinging.
★ Anchoring to the second half: this division stands after §17’s pivot (the second half, divisions 17–32). The first half’s (divisions 1–16) “is-not” is mostly applied to the outer objects of “marks · sentient beings · merit,” what is countered being the affliction-hindrance (breaking the four marks · emptiness-of-self); at this division (second half · emptiness-of-dharmas) the “is-not” is applied to “all dharmas without self” (the two no-selves · attaining patience) and to “the receiving of merit” (receiving without grasping) — breaking the dharma-clinging of “dharmas as real · merit as real attainment” (the dharma-self), what is countered being the cognitive hindrance (breaking the four views). The pivot-division 17’s 「通達無我、法」[0751b12] (the two emptinesses of person-self and dharma-self · Kuiji 「達我、法空，證無我理」[0147b09–10]) has already opened the gate of emptiness-of-dharmas; this division’s 「知一切法無我，得成於忍」 is its continued practice — Vasubandhu directly glosses 「知一切法無我得無生法忍者，有二種無我，不生二種無我相」T1511 [0795b23–25], the Yijing treatise 「於不生法得無性者，有二種無性，由其二性體不生故」T1513 [0883b24–26], Kuiji 「了達二我空故而得於忍」[0152c15] — all glossing this patience through “the two no-selves · the two emptinesses.” This turn of “emptiness-of-self → emptiness-of-dharmas · affliction-hindrance → cognitive hindrance · the second round cutting the cognitive hindrance” has its ancient-master ground at division 17 in Kuiji (after Vasubandhu) 「第二周為斷障，障即所知也」[0127c01–03] and Kuiji (after Asaṅga) 「為二種無我故……二種正覺」[0147b26–27] (see division 17, register 4).
First · 「一切法無我 — 得成於忍」 mapped onto the three natures (the station of emptiness-of-dharmas): Kuiji directly maps the three patiences onto the three natures — 「得成忍者，忍有三種：一者、本性無生忍，謂觀遍計所執人、法二相本無體故；二者、自然無生忍，觀依他假因緣非自然生故；三者、惑苦無生忍，觀於真如惑苦本不生故」[0152c16–20]:
- 本性無生忍 — observing that the two marks of person and dharma as 遍計所執 (the wholly-imagined, parikalpita) are originally without substance (the “is-not” · removing the wholly-imagined: the clung-to real self and real dharmas are originally empty).
- 自然無生忍 — observing that the 依他 (the other-dependent, paratantra) provisional causes-and-conditions do not arise of themselves (dependent-arising · arising-by-conditions without own-nature).
- 惑苦無生忍 — observing that in 真如 (suchness · the perfectly-accomplished, pariniṣpanna) affliction-and-suffering are originally non-arising (suchness made manifest).
This reading of the “is-not” mapped onto the three natures is here directly shown in this division through Kuiji’s “three patiences” (wholly-imagined · other-dependent · perfectly-accomplished), per Shi Huijing’s The Threefold “Is-Not” Mapped onto the Yogācāra Three Natures 〔from S5-P01〕; this division is one application of it at the station of “no-self attaining patience · emptiness-of-dharmas.”
Second · 「受福德 — 不取福德 — 是故取福德」 (the Able-to-Cut three clauses) mapped onto the three natures (the receiving of merit):
- 受福德 (X) is the other-dependent (依他起) — merit produced from conditioned cultivation of good conduct, conventionally sayable and receivable (Kuiji 「菩薩所行福德」
[0152c23]; Paramārtha 「可得攝持」[0766a20]). Merit is not nothing, so one “receives,” so “therefore one grasps.” - 不取福德 is the removal of the wholly-imagined (遍計所執) — not the discriminatively clung-to “real attainment · merit of defiled fruition” (Vasubandhu 「取者，彼福德得有漏果報……如取非道故」
T1511 [0795b28–c01]; Kuiji 「不著自體等故，但希出世，故云不受也」[0152c23–24]; Paramārtha 「不可執取」[0766a21]). “Not grasping” removes the clinging to “merit as real attainment · coveting a defiled fruition,” not that there is no merit. - 是故取福德／是故說不受 is the setting up of the perfectly-accomplished (圓成, and also the conventionally sayable) — the undefiled merit, without real attainment yet held by suchness (Vasubandhu 「是福德無報，如是受不取……無彼有漏報，是故此福德受而不取」
T1511 [0795b14·c01–02]; Kumārajīva 「不應貪著，是故說不受福德」[0752b01–02]; the Yijing treatise 「彼福無報故，正取非越取」T1513 [0883b27]). Receiving its good without coveting its fruition is precisely the setting up of the perfectly-accomplished — Kuiji 「以不貪著自體等而行福德，故名為不受也」[0152c28–29].
The eye of this division (★ second half · emptiness-of-dharmas): the single “is-not” form, at this division, is applied to “all dharmas without self · attaining patience” (the two no-selves · the two emptinesses) and to “the receiving of merit” (receiving without grasping) — not the first half’s (divisions 1–16) application to the outer objects of “marks · sentient beings · the more-or-less of merit” (the person-self · breaking the four marks · the affliction-hindrance), but the second half’s (divisions 17–32) application to the subtle clinging of “dharmas as real · merit as real attainment” (the dharma-self · breaking the four views · the cognitive hindrance). This is precisely the continued practice of the pivot-division 17’s “emptiness-of-self turning to emptiness-of-dharmas · affliction-hindrance turning to cognitive hindrance”: division 17 judges “penetrating no-self and dharmas” (the two emptinesses of person and dharma); this division 28 advances into setting down its patience-station with 「知一切法無我，得成於忍」 and its receiving-station with 「不受福德」 — Vasubandhu 「不失功德因·得勝忍不失·是福德無報·如是受不取」T1511 [0795b11–14], Kuiji 「了達二我空故而得於忍·不著自體等故云不受」[0152c15·c23–24], all “removing the dharma-clinging (the is-not · not grasping) while preserving the receivable (the is-called · receiving its good).” This reading of the “is-not” mapped onto the three natures: see Shi Huijing’s The Threefold “Is-Not” Mapped onto the Yogācāra Three Natures 〔from S5-P01〕; this division is one application of it at the station of “no-self attaining patience · receiving merit without grasping · emptiness-of-dharmas.” “Not receiving, not grasping” (receiving its good without coveting its fruition · merit without attainment) is the scriptural counterpart of the Thirty Verses’ “transformation-of-the-basis · no-attainment” 〔from S5-P06〕 (see register 7).
4 · Variant Readings of the Ancient Masters (by school · attaining patience’s two no-selves · merit not lost · receiving without grasping · emphasized)
Core emphasis — Vasubandhu’s Vajracchedikā-śāstra verse (the cause of merit not lost · the supreme patience attained not lost · this merit has no fruition, thus received-yet-not-grasped), preserved in two Chinese renderings: Vasubandhu founds this division on “breaking the doubt that attaining patience loses merit,” glossing “the patience attained surpasses the prior giving’s merit” with the verse 「不失功德因，及彼勝果報；得勝忍不失，以得無垢果」 and “receiving merit · not grasping merit” with the verse 「是福德無報，如是受不取」, each anchored item-by-item to the scripture; the two renderings differ in name, are one in sense.
Vasubandhu T1511 (Bodhiruci rendering): first citing the scripture (the Bodhiruci sūtra 「菩薩受福德，不取福德，是故菩薩取福德」[0795b06]), then setting the doubt — 「有人起如是心：『若不依福德得大菩提，如是諸菩薩摩訶薩則失福德及失果報。』自下經文為斷此疑」[0795b08–10]. The treatise-verse [0795b11–14]:
「不失功德因，及彼勝果報；得勝忍不失，以得無垢果。 示勝福德相，是故說譬喻；是福德無報，如是受不取。」
- Glossing “attaining patience does not lose merit”: 「雖不依福德得真菩提，而不失福德及彼果報。何以故？以能成就智慧莊嚴、功德莊嚴故」
[0795b15–17]; 「有人起如是心：『諸菩薩摩訶薩得無生法忍，以得出世間智，失彼福德及以果報。』為遮此故，示現福德不失，而更得清淨殊勝功德，是故不失」[0795b18–21]. - Glossing “knowing all dharmas without self, attaining the patience of no-arising” (the two no-selves): 「若復有菩薩知一切法無我得無生法忍者，有二種無我，不生二種無我相，是故受而不取」
[0795b23–25]. - Glossing “receiving merit · not grasping merit” (received-yet-not-grasped · merit without fruition): 「云何菩薩受福德不取福德？偈言『是福德無報』，如是受不取故。此義云何？取者，彼福德得有漏果報。以有漏果報故，彼福德可訶……如是取者名之為取，如取非道故。『此福德無報』，無報者，無彼有漏報，是故此福德受而不取」
[0795b27–c02].
Vasubandhu T1513 (Yijing rendering): first setting the doubt — 「若言福不證菩提者，此即菩薩福業其果應斷。為釋此疑，故有下文，言此福性雖復不能親招覺處」[0883b13–15]. The verse [0883b16–19]:
「其福不失亡，果報不斷絕，得忍亦不斷，以獲無垢故。 更論於福因，為此陳其喻，彼福無報故，正取非越取。」
- 「由此是彼智資糧性故」
[0883b20]; 「又有疑云：『既得無生法忍智乃不生，菩薩諸福皆應斷絕。』為顯福不斷絕至極清淨，獲福既多果報亦勝，於不生法得無性者有二種無性，由其二性體不生故」[0883b22–26]; glossing “right-grasping / over-grasping”: 「凡所有福招果報者，是可厭故，當知彼取即是越取，如越正路而行嶮道。而彼福不招報，是故彼是正取非為越取」[0883b27–c01].
〔Correspondence of the two renderings: 不失功德因·及彼勝果報／其福不失亡·果報不斷絕 (merit not lost) · 得勝忍不失·以得無垢果／得忍亦不斷·以獲無垢故 (patience attained not lost · undefiled) · 是福德無報·如是受不取／彼福無報故·正取非越取 (merit without defiled fruition · received-yet-not-grasped / right-grasping not over-grasping) — two Chinese renderings of one Vasubandhu treatise, differing in name, one in sense. Both gloss “attaining patience” through “the two no-selves / the two no-natures” (T1511 [0795b24] / T1513 [0883b25]), and both gloss “not receiving merit” through “merit having no defiled fruition, thus received-yet-not-grasped (right-grasping not over-grasping).”〕
Asaṅga T1510 (Dharmagupta rendering): this division belongs to the eighteen abodes’ seventeenth, the path-of-witness (the abode of the purified mind [0758c03–04]), and among the six attainments of the Buddha-stage that subsume the transformation-of-the-basis after witness (the purity of land · supreme vision-and-knowledge · accompanying excellent marks · mark-body · speech · mind-attainment [0757c28–0758a01]), to the mind-attainment · fifth item, “not abiding in birth-death or nirvāṇa” — 「為不住涅槃故，經言『須菩提！如是念：「發行菩薩乘者，有法說斷滅」耶』如是等。為不住流轉故，經言『須菩提！菩薩於福聚，不應受，不應取』如是等。受者，說有故。取者，取彼道故。如福聚及果中，皆不應者」[0758a24–29]. 〔Asaṅga’s passage here only sets the scriptural-text’s placement among the abodes (not-abiding-in-nirvāṇa = not-saying-annihilation · division 27; not-abiding-in-flux = the merit-mass not-to-be-received-not-to-be-grasped · this division 28; “the receiver speaks of existence · the grasper grasps that path” glossing the distinction of “receive / grasp”); the opening-out of its “attaining patience’s two no-selves · merit received-yet-not-grasped” is supplied by Vasubandhu’s commentary and Kuiji’s citation, see the Vasubandhu entry above and the Kuiji entry below.〕
Jizang (Three-Treatise) T1699: coming from the foregoing breaking of the doubt of annihilation — 「明菩薩得無生忍，得妙智慧妙福德，豈失福德因果墮斷滅中耶」[0122b26–28]; glossing the relation of “arousing the mind of awakening” and “attaining the patience of no-arising”: 「初得無生忍，亦名初發心也……初後不二，如云『發心、畢竟二不別』也」[0122b29–c02]. Glossing the repeated weighing of “giving the seven treasures of worlds numerous as Ganges sands”: 「前為格量持經四句，今為格量菩薩無我忍也。此是人法無我，故名無我忍也」[0122c08–10]. Glossing “not receiving merit”: 「『不受福德』者，不受有所得福德故，此菩薩勝前菩薩，前菩薩受有得福德故不及後菩薩也」[0122c10–12]; resolving by question-answer the “not receiving / not coveting”: 「問：菩薩既作福德，云何不貪著耶？答：菩薩以無受心作故不生貪心，多非作福德，然復不貪也」[0122c12–14].
Zhiyi (Tiantai) T1698: schematizing as 「『若人滿恒沙七寶』下，結般若成忍」[0083a21–22], with three sub-parts — 「初、明體道成忍之行無所有，次、明體道證忍之人無所有，三、明體道行忍之用無所有，以行成人、人故有用，備明無所有」[0083a22–25]. Glossing the consummating practice of patience: 「次『若復有人』下，明成忍之行無所有，忘我則忍成，超出故勝也」[0083a25–27]. Glossing the witnessing person of patience (the cause-person does not receive): 「『白佛』下，第二明體道證忍之人無所有，初、明因人不受，後、明果人不受。初、明因中有問答，乃云不受亦不受，受其報種已名貪著，無存我、人，邪染何生」[0083a27–b01].
Kuiji (Yogācāra) T1700: after Vasubandhu 「此第三功德校量」[0152c10] and Asaṅga 「此第二明不捨涅槃」 (mind-attainment’s fifth · not abiding in birth-death or nirvāṇa) [0152c12]. Glossing “attaining realization in patience” (the emptiness of the two selves · the three patiences mapped onto the three natures): 「謂因了達二我空故而得於忍，其福過彼所施功德也。得成忍者，忍有三種：一者、本性無生忍，謂觀遍計所執人、法二相本無體故；二者、自然無生忍，觀依他假因緣非自然生故；三者、惑苦無生忍，觀於真如惑苦本不生故」[0152c15–20]. Glossing “not receiving merit” (not clinging to own-substance · only aspiring to the supramundane): 「『不受福德故』者，謂菩薩所行福德，不著自體等故，但希出世，故云不受也」[0152c23–24]; glossing the Buddha’s answer “not to be coveted”: 「述曰，此第三佛答也。以不貪著自體等而行福德，故名為不受也」[0152c28–29].
The three ancient-master streams (Three-Treatise · Tiantai · Yogācāra) at this division converge upon Vasubandhu’s verse: attaining patience = the patience-of-no-arising of knowing all dharmas without self (reaching the two no-selves · the two emptinesses of person and dharma, which is why it is called the patience of no-self); not receiving merit = receiving-yet-not-grasping (receiving its good · not coveting the defiled fruition · without real attainment). Jizang “the no-self of person and dharma is why it is called the patience of no-self · working with a non-receiving mind, so not coveting,” Zhiyi “forgetting the self, patience is consummated · not-receiving even not-received · having received the seed of its fruition is already called coveting,” Kuiji (after Vasubandhu and Asaṅga) “penetrating the emptiness of the two selves, so attaining patience · the three patiences mapped onto imagined-dependent-suchness · not clinging to own-substance, only aspiring to the supramundane, so it is called not-receiving” — each anchored item-by-item to 「知一切法無我·得成於忍·不受福德·不應貪著」. This is the ancient masters’ settled reading of this division’s “the patience of no-self · not-receiving-not-grasping,” and the scriptural ground of §17’s second half “cutting the cognitive hindrance · breaking the view of dharmas” (the two no-selves · emptiness-of-dharmas).
5 · Terminology
無生法忍／得成於忍 anutpattika-dharma-kṣānti (the patience that arises by reaching all-dharmas-without-self · no-arising; for the rendering-differences Kumārajīva 「得成於忍」 · Bodhiruci 「無生法忍」 · Paramārtha 「無生忍」 · Xuanzang 「堪忍」 · Yijing 「忍解」 see register 2; Kuiji’s three patiences 「本性無生·自然無生·惑苦無生」[0152c16–20]) ·
二無我／二我空 (the no-self of person pudgala-nairātmya + the no-self of dharma dharma-nairātmya; Vasubandhu 「有二種無我，不生二種無我相」T1511 [0795b24–25], the Yijing treatise 「二種無性，由其二性體不生故」T1513 [0883b25–26], Jizang 「人法無我，故名無我忍」[0122c09–10], Kuiji 「了達二我空故而得於忍」[0152c15]) ·
不受福德／不取福德 na ... puṇya-skandhaṃ parigṛhṇāti (receiving-yet-not-grasping · receiving its good without coveting the defiled fruition; for the rendering-differences Kumārajīva · Yijing 「不受／不應貪著／正取非越取」 · Bodhiruci 「受福德不取福德是故取福德」 · Paramārtha 「攝持／不執取」 · Xuanzang 「所應攝受不應攝受」 · Dharmagupta 「取應不取應」 see register 2) ·
不應貪著 na ... abhiniviśate (Kumārajīva 「菩薩所作福德，不應貪著，是故說不受福德」[0752b01–02]; Kuiji 「以不貪著自體等而行福德，故名為不受也」[0152c28–29]; Jizang 「無受心作故不生貪心……然復不貪」[0122c13–14]) ·
有漏果報 (the defiled fruition removed when “merit has no fruition”; Vasubandhu 「取者，彼福德得有漏果報……此福德無報，無彼有漏報，是故此福德受而不取」T1511 [0795b28–c02]) ·
無垢果 (the undefiled fruit gained by attaining supreme patience; Vasubandhu’s verse 「得勝忍不失，以得無垢果」T1511 [0795b12] / Yijing 「得忍亦不斷，以獲無垢故」T1513 [0883b17]) ·
不住生死涅槃／不住流轉 (the Buddha-stage mind-attainment’s fifth item; Asaṅga 「為不住流轉故，經言『菩薩於福聚，不應受，不應取』」T1510a [0758a26–27]). 〔Sanskrit as a pronunciation aid; for the rendering-differences of “得成於忍／不受福德” see register 2.〕
6 · Simile and Rhetoric (not-receiving-not-grasping · the counter-display of comparative merit and the reversal of receiving-yet-not-grasping)
This division has no concrete simile (the empty-space simile is at division 4 · the Sumeru simile at divisions 10 and 17 · the patience-sage simile at division 14 · the see-by-form-seek-by-sound verse at division 26 · the six similes at division 32). The point of the rhetoric lies in the counter-display of comparative merit and the reversal of “receive / not receive”:
- The counter-display of comparative merit: this division, with the merit of “giving the seven treasures of worlds filled numerous as Ganges sands,” counter-displays the surpassing merit of “knowing all dharmas without self, attaining realization in patience” (Kumārajīva 「此菩薩勝前菩薩所得功德」
[0752a27–28]) — using the merit of a vast wealth-giving as a foil to display that the merit of no-self attaining patience exceeds that of giving. This “comparative merit” shares the structure of divisions 8 (seven treasures against the four-line verse), 11 (Ganges sands against upholding the sūtra), and 19 (seven treasures against the “is-not” of merit), all the brushstroke of “displaying merit by counter” (Zhiyi 「以無福為福，故多也」[0082b17–18]). This division’s comparison alone falls on the side of “the patience of no-self” (not upholding the sūtra), hence Jizang 「今為格量菩薩無我忍也」[0122c08–09]. - The reversal of “receive / not receive” (the “is-not” form applied to merit): the positive saying “the bodhisattvas do not receive merit” (seemingly blocking merit entirely), then abruptly reversed by question-answer — 「云何不受？」「菩薩所作福德，不應貪著，是故說不受」 (Kumārajīva
[0752a29–b02]): not that there is no merit, but receiving its good without coveting its fruition. The Able-to-Cut versions most plainly show the three-clause reversal: 「菩薩受福德，不取福德，是故菩薩取福德」 (Bodhiruci[0756c06–07]) — receive (the other-dependent receivable) · not grasp (removing the wholly-imagined real attainment) · grasp (is-called · the conventional undefiled merit), three turns within one statement. Zhiyi 「乃云不受亦不受，受其報種已名貪著」[0083a29–b01], Vasubandhu 「是福德無報，如是受不取」T1511 [0795b14], both showing this double sense of “received-yet-not-grasped · merit without fruition.” - The self-forgetting of “attaining patience”: Zhiyi 「忘我則忍成，超出故勝也」
[0083a26–27]— the practice that consummates patience lies in “forgetting the self” (reaching no-self), the patience consummated through emptiness-of-self · emptiness-of-dharmas (the two no-selves), not attainable by forced endurance. This brushstroke of “forgetting the self to consummate patience” runs in the same track as division 14’s forbearance “without the mark of self · without the mark of person” (beyond marks, the peace of cessation), while this division advances to the no-self of dharmas (all dharmas without self). This register shows its rhetoric in this division (the counter-display of comparative merit · the three-clause reversal of receiving-yet-not-grasping · forgetting-self to consummate patience), while the concrete similes are emphasized at divisions 4 · 14 · 26 · 32.
7 · Cross-Reading
- Thirty Verses (T1586): the two emptinesses · transformation-of-the-basis · no-attainment (v.29 the perfectly-accomplished · transformation-of-the-basis) — this division’s 「知一切法無我·得成於忍」 is the scriptural counterpart of the Thirty Verses’ “transformation-of-the-basis made manifest by the two no-selves · the two emptinesses” (the patience of no-arising consummated conditioned on the two no-selves); 「不受福德·受而不取」 is the merit-station of “no-attainment · nothing coveted.”
- Cheng weishi lun (T1585): the two hindrances · the two clingings (the dharma-self clung-to by the cognitive hindrance) · undefiled merit — this division’s 「了達二我空故而得於忍」 〔Kuiji’s words, register 4〕 is the scriptural counterpart of Cheng weishi lun’s “cutting the two hindrances · witnessing the suchness of the two emptinesses”; 「福德無有漏報·受而不取」 is the removing of the dharma-clinging of “merit as real attainment · defiled fruition” clung-to by the cognitive hindrance, while preserving the undefiled provision.
- Madhyānta-vibhāga (T1600): the chapter discerning the real · the two emptinesses · no-attainment (the second half’s emptiness-of-dharmas · the cognitive hindrance purified) — the treatise-counterpart of this division’s 「二無我·無生法忍」.
- Twenty Verses (T1590): consciousness-only without object · removing the clung-to real dharma — 「知一切法無我」 removes the clinging to “dharmas” as mind-external real existents, of one lineage with the Twenty Verses’ refutation of real objects (emptiness-of-dharmas · removing the wholly-imagined real dharma).
- Baifa (T1614): “suchness” among the six unconditioned · no-arising (Kuiji’s third patience, 「惑苦無生忍，觀於真如惑苦本不生」
〔see register 4〕) — the name-counterpart of this division’s “suchness · no-arising.” - Heart Sūtra (T251): 「以無所得故」「無智亦無得」 — this division’s 「不受福德·受而不取·無實得」 is the merit-station of the Heart Sūtra’s “nothing attained” (merit without real attainment, yet undefiled merit vivid).
This division’s 「知一切法無我·得成於忍·不受福德」 is the scriptural counterpart of the Thirty Verses’ and Cheng weishi lun’s “the two no-selves · the two emptinesses · transformation-of-the-basis · no-attainment · cutting the cognitive hindrance”; 「不受福德·受而不取」 is the same no-attainment dharma-station as the Heart Sūtra’s “because nothing is attained · no wisdom and no attainment.” Shi Huijing’s thesis “the Diamond Sūtra says in scriptural language what Cheng weishi lun says in technical language” 〔from From the Hundred Dharmas to the Diamond S5-P10〕: the Diamond Sūtra’s single phrase 「知一切法無我，得成於忍」「不受福德」, Cheng weishi lun says the same matter in the technical language of “the suchness of the two emptinesses · the patience of no-arising · cutting the cognitive hindrance · undefiled provision.” “Not-receiving-not-grasping” is the transformation-of-the-basis · no-attainment sense of “let the mind arise abiding nowhere” 〔from S5-P06; the ancient masters at register 4〕. 〔Convention: list only what is genuinely pertinent; no forced pegging — linkage, not padding. The Mahāyāna-saṃgraha has no frontal correspondence here, omitted. Cheng weishi lun is in progress — a stable name-citation, to add a link once complete; the ancient-master citations are at register 4, not repeated in the cross-reading.〕
8 · East–West Observation (Western perspective · observation, not adjudication)
- The desireless conduct of “not receiving merit · receiving-yet-not-grasping · not to be coveted” ↔ Western ethics’ “selfless / non-utilitarian good” (Kant’s good will “for the sake of duty · not from inclination or reward”; Aristotle’s “acting for its own sake”): the West mostly argues from the purity of motive (acting well not for reward · removing the self-interested motive); the ancient-master / Yogācāra reading of “not receiving merit” is not merely purity of motive, but the removing of the dharma-clinging of “merit as real attainment · defiled fruition” clung-to by the cognitive hindrance (Vasubandhu 「取者，彼福德得有漏果報……此福德無報」
T1511 [0795b28–c02], Kuiji 「不著自體等故，但希出世」[0152c23–24]) — it is the perfectly-accomplished made manifest by cutting the hindrance and turning to the undefiled — after “not grasping” there is “therefore grasp” (receiving its good · undefiled merit vivid), not a purely motive-removing ethical proposition. - The no-self of “knowing all dharmas without self · attaining realization in patience” ↔ the West’s “no-self doctrine / deconstruction of the self” (Hume’s bundle-theory no-self · extended to no-thing; the postmodern dissolution of the subject): the West mostly argues from the unestablishability of the self (the subject); the ancient masters speak of it through “the two no-selves · the two emptinesses of person and dharma” (Vasubandhu 「有二種無我」
T1511 [0795b24], Kuiji 「了達二我空」[0152c15]) — not only no-self-of-person (the subject empty) but also no-self-of-dharma (all dharmas empty), and after “no-self” there is “attaining patience” (the patience of no-arising · suchness made manifest), the perfectly-accomplished witnessed by cutting the two hindrances and transforming the basis, not merely a deconstruction of the subject or a psychological sense of no-self. - The neither-cut-off-nor-clinging of “merit without fruition · right-grasping not over-grasping” ↔ the West’s “acting without clinging to results” (or the Stoics’ “do what is fitting · not bound to the outcome”): comparable; yet Yogācāra’s “receiving-yet-not-grasping” is not merely an attitude of non-attachment to results, but merit having no defiled fruition, thus received as undefiled provision (the Yijing treatise 「彼福無報故，正取非越取」
T1513 [0883b27], Vasubandhu 「無彼有漏報，是故此福德受而不取」T1511 [0795c01–02]) — the distinction of “right-grasping” (receiving its undefiled · the provision of wisdom) and “over-grasping” (coveting the defiled fruition · like leaving the right road for a perilous path) is a cultivation-and-witnessing with something cut and something made manifest, not a vague non-attachment. - The point of the observation: the West tends to take “not receiving merit · no-self” as the proposition of pure motive · deconstruction of the subject · non-attachment to results (why the good must be selfless · why the self cannot be established · how to act without clinging); the ancient masters take “the two no-selves attaining patience · merit received-yet-not-grasped” as the cultivation-and-witnessing of reaching the two emptinesses · attaining the patience of no-arising · removing the dharma-clinging · turning to undefiled provision · cutting the cognitive hindrance (what is removed being the dharma-self · the clinging to defiled fruition, the not-receiving being precisely the undefiled merit made manifest by cutting the hindrance). The proposition of motive · deconstruction versus the cultivation-and-witnessing of cutting-the-hindrance · transformation-of-the-basis — this itself is 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 [0752a25–b02] (root · Not Receiving, Not Grasping). The six versions’ passage on attaining patience and not receiving merit [loc]: see register 2 — Bodhiruci T0236a [0756c02–c07] · Paramārtha T0237 [0766a15–a21] · Dharmagupta T0238 [0771b05–b10] · Xuanzang T220⑨ [0985b05–b12] · Yijing T0239 [0775a20–a25]. Sectioning / treatise sources: Asaṅga T1510a [0757c28–0758a02·0758a24–a29·0758c03–04] · Vasubandhu T1511 [0795b08–0795c02] (verse [0795b11–b14]) · Vasubandhu T1513 [0883b13–0883c01] (verse [0883b16–b19]). Ancient masters: Jizang T1699 [0122b25–0122c14] · Zhiyi T1698 [0083a21–0083b01] · Kuiji T1700 [0152c08–0152c29].
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · jingang · Division 28 · Not Receiving, Not Grasping · apparatus · Spring 2026