文殊師利所說摩訶般若波羅蜜經 文殊般若 · 卷下 · 云何修
文殊觀正法無為無相，得與不得、證與不證、作與不作，都不能被固定在一邊；連般若與般若境界也不可另立為所取。正因如此，他才追問：法相如是，究竟怎樣學般若？佛沒有另造一法，只說能如是知諸法相，就是學般若；若欲學菩提自在三昧，也須在這般若中學，所得能照明甚深佛法、知諸佛名、達諸佛世界而無礙。般若雖有名，卻無邊無際、無名無相，如法界而無分齊；雖名行處，又以無念無作鬆開對行處的執取。末後文殊仍問「當云何行」，把讀者送入下一段：無所得沒有取消修行，而是先不讓修行變成可以抓取的法、境界與成果。
Mañjuśrī contemplates the right Dharma as unconditioned and without marks. Attainment and non-attainment, realization and non-realization, and activity and non-activity cannot be fixed on either side; even prajñā and the realm of prajñā cannot be separately established as what is grasped. Precisely for this reason, he asks: since the marks of dharmas are like this, how, ultimately, does one learn prajñā? The Buddha does not fabricate another dharma, but says only that knowing the marks of all dharmas in this way is learning prajñā. If one wishes to learn the samādhi of mastery in awakening, one must likewise learn within this prajñā; what follows from attaining it is the ability to illuminate the profound Buddha-Dharmas, know the names of all Buddhas, and comprehend their worlds without obstruction. Though prajñā has a name, it has no border or limit and neither name nor mark; like the dharma-realm, it has no boundary. Though it is called a sphere of practice, the absence of thought and activity loosens grasping at that sphere. At the end Mañjuśrī still asks 「當云何行」— “How should one practice?” — sending the reader into the next passage: non-attainment has not canceled practice, but first prevents practice from becoming a dharma, realm, or result that can be grasped.
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · Mañjuśrī Prajñāpāramitā · How Should One Practice? · Heart-Essence · Summer 2026
〔T08 0731a〕 爾時文殊師利白佛言：「世尊！我觀正法，無為無相，無得無利，無生無滅，無來無去，無知者、無見者、無作者。不見般若波羅蜜，亦不見般若波羅蜜境界，非證非不證。不作戲論，無有分別。一切法無盡離盡，無凡夫法，無聲聞法，無辟支佛法、佛法。非得非不得，不捨生死，不證涅槃。非思議非不思議，非作非不作。法相如是。不知云何當學般若波羅蜜？」爾時佛告文殊師利：「若能如是知諸法相，是名當學般若波羅蜜。菩薩摩訶薩若欲學菩提自在三昧，得是三昧已，照明一切甚深佛法，及知一切諸佛名字，亦悉了達諸佛世界，無有障礙，當如文殊師利所說般若波羅蜜中學。」文殊師利白佛言：「世尊！何以故名般若波羅蜜？」佛言：「般若波羅蜜無邊無際，無名無相，非思量，無歸依，無洲渚，無犯無福，無晦無明，猶如法界，無有分齊，亦無限數，是名般若波羅蜜，亦名菩薩摩訶薩行處。非處非不行處，悉入一乘，名非行處。何以故？無念無作故。」文殊師利白佛言：「世尊！當云何行能速得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？」
The canonical text stands in Chinese only. This edition renders the essence, the plain reading, the exposition and the apparatus into English — never the sūtra itself. Switch to 漢讀本 or 並行雙語 above to read it.
這時，文殊師利對佛說：『世尊，我觀察正法：它不是由因緣造作而成，也沒有固定形相；沒有可得的東西，也沒有可據為利益的成果；沒有生滅，沒有來去，也沒有固定的知者、見者或作者。我不見一個可執取的般若波羅蜜，也不見一個可界定的般若波羅蜜境界；不能固定說已證或未證，不作種種戲論，也不生分別。
『一切法不可窮盡，也遠離窮盡；其中沒有固定的凡夫法、聲聞法、辟支佛法或佛法。不能固定說已得或未得；不捨生死，也不把涅槃立作可證取的境界；不能固定說可思議或不可思議，是造作或不是造作。法的形相既然如此，我不知道應當怎樣學般若波羅蜜？』
佛告訴文殊師利：『若能像這樣了知諸法之相，這就叫作應當學般若波羅蜜。菩薩摩訶薩若想學菩提自在三昧，得到三昧以後，便能照明一切甚深佛法，知道一切諸佛的名字，通達諸佛世界而沒有障礙；應當依照文殊師利所說的般若波羅蜜來學。』
文殊師利又問佛：『世尊，為什麼稱作般若波羅蜜？』
佛說：『般若波羅蜜沒有邊際，也沒有盡頭；沒有固定名稱，也沒有固定形相；不是思量所能取得，沒有可供歸依執取的所在，也沒有可作停靠的洲島；其中沒有可執取的罪與福，也沒有昏暗與光明。它如同法界，沒有可劃定的分界，也沒有可計數的限量，所以稱作般若波羅蜜，也稱作菩薩摩訶薩修行的所在。
『它不是一個固定處所，也不是不行之處；一切都進入一乘，因此稱作非行之處。為什麼呢？因為其中沒有可執取的念，也沒有可執取的造作。』
文殊師利再問佛：『世尊，究竟應當怎樣修行，才能迅速證得無上正等正覺？』
At that time Mañjuśrī said to the Buddha, ‘World-Honored One, I contemplate the right Dharma in this way: it is not produced through causes and conditions and has no fixed form; there is nothing to be attained and no result to be claimed as a gain. It has no arising or ceasing, no coming or going, and no fixed knower, seer, or agent. I do not see a prajñā-pāramitā that can be grasped, nor do I see a definable realm of prajñā-pāramitā. It cannot be fixed as realized or unrealized. I do not engage in conceptual proliferation of any kind, nor do I give rise to discrimination.
‘All dharmas cannot be exhausted and are also apart from exhaustion. Within them there is no fixed dharma of ordinary beings, śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, or Buddhas. It cannot be fixed as attained or unattained. Birth-and-death is not relinquished, nor is nirvāṇa established as a realm to be realized and appropriated. It cannot be fixed as conceivable or inconceivable, made or not made. Since the marks of dharmas are like this, I do not know how one should learn prajñā-pāramitā.’
The Buddha told Mañjuśrī, ‘If one can know the marks of all dharmas in this way, this is called learning prajñā-pāramitā. If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva wishes to learn the samādhi of mastery in awakening, then after attaining this samādhi that bodhisattva can illuminate all profound Buddha-Dharmas, know the names of all Buddhas, and comprehend the worlds of all Buddhas without obstruction. One should learn according to the prajñā-pāramitā taught by Mañjuśrī.’
Mañjuśrī again asked the Buddha, ‘World-Honored One, why is it called prajñā-pāramitā?’
The Buddha said, ‘Prajñā-pāramitā has no boundary and no end, no fixed name and no fixed form. It cannot be attained through thought. It has no place that can be appropriated as a refuge and no island upon which one can come to rest. Within it there is no offense or merit that can be grasped, and neither darkness nor light. Like the dharma-realm, it has no boundary that can be drawn and no limit that can be counted. It is therefore called prajñā-pāramitā and is also called the sphere of practice of a bodhisattva-mahāsattva.
‘It is not a fixed place, nor is it a place where one does not practice. Everything enters the one vehicle, and so it is called a non-place of practice. Why? Because within it there is no thought that can be grasped and no activity that can be grasped.’
Mañjuśrī again asked the Buddha, ‘World-Honored One, how, ultimately, should one practice so as swiftly to realize unsurpassed perfect awakening?’
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · Mañjuśrī Prajñāpāramitā · How Should One Practice? · Vernacular · Summer 2026
法相如是，為什麼反而問怎樣學？
文殊先把問題推到最尖銳的地方。他觀正法無為無相，也不在其中安立一個得到利益的人；生滅、來去，以及知者、見者、作者，都不能被抓成固定實體。連般若與般若的境界，也不被另立成眼前可見、伸手可得的東西。
所以他的問題不是缺少一個修行步驟，而是：若得與不得、證與不證、作與不作都不能固定安立，『學般若』還能是什麼意思？這一問很重要。若急著添一套方法，便可能重新造出能學的人與所學的法；若因此說全然不必學，又與經中反覆說當學般若相違。
僧伽婆羅本保存了幾乎同序的長段，也從文殊觀正法無為無相，一路問到法相如是而不知云何學般若。兩譯共同保留這個難處：不是先給方法，而是先追問，當一切可取的立足點都放下時，修學如何成立。
佛答「如是知」，是不是只要懂一個道理？
佛答得極短：能像這樣知道諸法之相，這就叫作學般若。這不是把修行改成記住一個答案。文殊剛才所說的「如是」，包含不把生滅、得失、證不證、思議不思議固著成兩邊；佛把學安立在這種如實知見中，不再另加一個可被佔有的般若。
兩個古譯在這裡有一點可供留心的差別。曼陀羅仙本的答句多一個「當」字，僧伽婆羅本少此字；而曼陀羅仙本的「當」字本身又有異本缺文。這把讀者帶回經句而不是替經句裁決：無論是否保留「當」，兩本都把「如是知諸法相」與「學般若」緊接在一起。義疏只沿這條連文開講，不以異本裁改經義。
既然無得，為何還要學菩提自在三昧？
佛沒有在『如是知』之後停住，隨即說菩薩若想學菩提自在三昧，也應在文殊所說的般若中學。經文並且列出得定之後的作用：照明一切甚深佛法，知道一切諸佛名字，通達諸佛世界而沒有障礙。
這一段不許人把前面的無得讀成什麼都沒有。經文一面不立可取的般若境界，一面明說三昧可學，也明說所得功用；只是它沒有把菩提自在三昧解成一件可據為所有的東西。學與無所得在同一答中並立，不能刪去其中任何一邊。
無名無相，為何仍叫般若波羅蜜？
文殊接著問名稱的理由。佛卻以一連串不能被名稱框住的語句回答：無邊無際、無名無相、非思量，沒有可執取的歸依處與洲渚，沒有可執取的犯福、晦明；又以法界無分齊、無限數來說般若。名稱在這裡不是替它劃定邊界，而是引人看見它不受邊界拘限。
經文又稱般若為菩薩的行處，隨即說非處、非不行處，並以悉入一乘、無念無作收束。底本「非處」另有異本作「非行」，這個文字分歧已留在考據，義疏不越過校本替它定句。可以確定的只有本章自己的走向：剛稱行處，便防止讀者把行處當成固定所在；剛說一乘，便以無念無作鬆開對行的執取。
問到「當云何行」，經文為何沒有就此結束？
文殊最後仍問：應當怎樣行，才能迅速證得無上正等正覺。這一問證明前面的無念無作沒有封閉修行。相反地，它清理了把法、境界、證得與行處抓實的方式，然後把『怎樣行』交到下一段。
下一單元中，佛先說依般若所說而行能速得菩提，再提出一行三昧。這使本單元成為一道門檻：先問在無所得中學如何成立，再進入聞般若、如說修學、繫心一佛等具體次第。若跳過這一道門檻，一行三昧容易被抓成另一個所得；若停在門檻不往下走，經文又不必再問當云何行。
承衍
僧伽婆羅本在古譯中保存了本單元的大段同文，使『如是知諸法相就是學般若』與菩提自在三昧的問答有清楚對讀。《大寶積經》第四十六會又完整承錄這一問答，使它進入寶積部的藏內傳承；清代《御錄經海一滴》亦把菩提自在三昧及其所得功用收入〈文殊師利所說摩訶般若波羅蜜經〉一節。
這些承衍首先保存的是經文次第：先觀法相不可取，再說如是知就是學；繼而說三昧可學，最後再問當云何行。現有材料沒有給出一條古德專釋此四百一十五字的逐文義疏，故本章不借別處注釋填空，而讓平行古譯與藏內承錄共同守住經句的先後。
Since the Marks of Dharmas Are Like This, Why Ask How One Should Learn?
Mañjuśrī first presses the question to its sharpest point. He contemplates the right Dharma as unconditioned and without marks and does not establish within it a person who obtains some benefit. Arising and ceasing, coming and going, and knower, seer, and agent cannot be grasped as fixed entities. Even prajñā and the realm of prajñā are not separately established as things visible before one’s eyes and obtainable by reaching out one’s hand.
His question is therefore not about lacking a step in a method of practice. It is this: if attainment and non-attainment, realization and non-realization, and activity and non-activity cannot be fixed in place, what can ‘learning prajñā’ still mean? This question is crucial. If one hastily adds a set of methods, one may construct anew a person who learns and a dharma that is learned. Yet if one therefore says there is absolutely nothing to learn, one contradicts the sūtra’s repeated instruction that prajñā should be learned.
The Saṅghabhara recension preserves a long passage in almost the same order. It too begins with Mañjuśrī contemplating the right Dharma as unconditioned and without marks and proceeds all the way to the statement that, since the marks of dharmas are like this, he does not know how to learn prajñā. Both translations preserve the same difficulty: they do not first provide a method, but first ask how cultivation and learning can be established when every graspable foothold has been relinquished.
When the Buddha Answers 「如是知」— “Know in This Way” — Does He Mean Merely Understanding a Principle?
The Buddha’s answer is extremely brief: to know the marks of all dharmas in this way is what it means to learn prajñā. This does not turn practice into memorizing an answer. The 「如是」— “in this way” — just stated by Mañjuśrī includes not fixing arising and ceasing, gain and loss, realization and non-realization, and conceivable and inconceivable into two opposing sides. The Buddha establishes learning within such knowledge and vision of things as they are and does not add another prajñā that can be possessed.
The two ancient translations have one small difference worth noticing here. The Mandrasena recension’s answer contains the character 「當」— “should” — while the Saṅghabhara recension does not. The 「當」 in the Mandrasena recension is itself absent from variant witnesses. This difference returns the reader to the words of the sūtra rather than deciding the sūtra on the reader’s behalf: whether or not 「當」 is retained, both texts directly join 「如是知諸法相」— “knowing the marks of all dharmas in this way” — to 「學般若」— “learning prajñā.” This exposition unfolds only that continuous wording and does not use the variant reading to revise the meaning of the sūtra.
Since There Is No Attainment, Why Learn the Samādhi of Mastery in Awakening?
The Buddha does not stop after “knowing in this way.” He immediately says that if bodhisattvas wish to learn the samādhi of mastery in awakening, they should likewise learn within the prajñā taught by Mañjuśrī. The sūtra also lists the functions that follow attainment of the samādhi: illuminating all profound Buddha-Dharmas, knowing the names of all Buddhas, and comprehending the worlds of all Buddhas without obstruction.
This passage does not permit the preceding teaching of no attainment to be read as saying that nothing whatsoever exists. On one side, the sūtra establishes no graspable realm of prajñā; on the other, it explicitly states that the samādhi can be learned and explicitly states its functions upon attainment. It simply does not construe the samādhi of mastery in awakening as a thing one can claim as one’s possession. Learning and non-attainment stand together within the same answer; neither side can be deleted.
If It Has Neither Name nor Mark, Why Is It Still Called Prajñā-Pāramitā?
Mañjuśrī next asks the reason for the name. The Buddha answers instead with a succession of phrases showing that it cannot be confined by names: without border or limit, without name or mark, not an object of thought, without a refuge or island that can be grasped, without offense or merit that can be grasped, and without darkness or light. He then speaks of prajñā through the dharma-realm’s lack of boundary and numerical limit. The name here does not draw a boundary around it; it directs one to see that it is not confined by boundaries.
The sūtra also calls prajñā the bodhisattva’s sphere of practice, and immediately says 「非處、非不行處」— “neither a fixed place nor a non-place of practice.” It then speaks of everything entering the one vehicle and concludes with the absence of thought and activity. The base text’s 「非處」— “not a place” — is read as 「非行」— “not practice” — in variant witnesses. This textual difference is preserved in the apparatus, and the exposition does not go beyond the textual record to decide the sentence. Only the movement of this chapter itself can be affirmed: as soon as it names a sphere of practice, it prevents the reader from taking that sphere as a fixed location; as soon as it speaks of the one vehicle, it loosens grasping at practice through the absence of thought and activity.
Why Does the Sūtra Not End When the Question Reaches 「當云何行」— “How Should One Practice?”
Mañjuśrī still asks at the end: how should one practice so as swiftly to attain unsurpassed perfect awakening? This question shows that the preceding absence of thought and activity has not closed the door on practice. On the contrary, it has cleared away the manner of reifying dharmas, realms, attainment, and the sphere of practice, and then hands the question of ‘how to practice’ to the next passage.
In the next unit, the Buddha first says that practicing according to what prajñā teaches enables one swiftly to attain awakening, and then introduces the single-practice samādhi. This makes the present unit a threshold: it first asks how learning can be established within non-attainment and then enters the concrete sequence of hearing prajñā, cultivating as taught, and binding the mind to one Buddha. If one skips this threshold, the single-practice samādhi can easily be grasped as another attainment. If one stops at the threshold and does not proceed, the sūtra would have no reason to ask again how one should practice.
Onward Transmission
Among the ancient translations, the Saṅghabhara recension preserves most of the same passage found in this unit, giving a clear parallel for the statement that knowing the marks of all dharmas in this way is learning prajñā and for the exchange on the samādhi of mastery in awakening. The forty-sixth assembly of the Mahāratnakūṭa Sūtra further preserves this exchange in full, carrying it into the scriptural transmission of the Ratnakūṭa collection. The Qing work compiled by Yinzhen, Imperial Record: A Drop from the Ocean of Sūtras, also includes the samādhi of mastery in awakening and its functions of illuminating the profound Buddha-Dharmas, knowing the names of Buddhas, and comprehending Buddha-worlds.
What these onward transmissions preserve first of all is the sequence of the sūtra: contemplate that the marks of dharmas cannot be grasped; then say that knowing in this way is learning; then say that the samādhi can be learned; and finally ask once more how one should practice. The materials presently available do not provide an ancient master’s line-by-line commentary devoted to these 415 characters. This chapter therefore does not borrow commentary from elsewhere to fill the space, but lets the parallel ancient translation and the citations within the canon preserve the order of the sūtra’s words together.
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · Mañjuśrī Prajñāpāramitā · How Should One Practice? · Exposition · Summer 2026
考據Apparatus
一、科判定位
《文殊師利所說摩訶般若波羅蜜經》不立品目。本單元依底本對話次第劃分，文字全在〔T08 0731a01–22〕，共四百一十五字。文殊先以一連串雙遮語觀正法，繼而問：法相既然如此，應當怎樣學般若。佛答，能如是知諸法相，就是學般若；若欲學菩提自在三昧，也應在文殊所說般若中學。文殊再問般若波羅蜜得名之故，佛以無邊無際、無名無相、無念無作等語回答；末後文殊把問題落在『當云何行』，直接引出下一單元的一行三昧問答。
節名「云何修」取自末問「當云何行」之意。
二、異譯對勘
（一）證據強度
僧伽婆羅本 T08n0233 在本單元取得七組同序密聚的長段共文，集中於〔T08 0738a07–24〕，每組約三十五至六十字，故本單元與該處義段對讀屬強證成。這只證成兩段可以對讀，不等於兩譯逐字相同，也不逕證所有義項全同。
玄奘《大般若波羅蜜多經》第七曼殊室利分 T07n0220 在本單元只得一枚逐字線索，未達雙線索密聚的證成門檻。因此本目只誌錄未證成，不引玄奘本文，也不由未證成反推其必無對應義段。
（二）三組義段對讀
一、觀正法
- 曼陀羅仙本：「我觀正法，無為無相，無得無利，無生無滅，無來無去，無知者、無見者、無作者。」〔T08 0731a〕
- 僧伽婆羅本：「我觀正法，無為無相，無得無利，無生無滅，無去無來，無知者無見者無作者」〔T08 0738a·下文續〕
兩本的義項次第高度相近；「來去」次序與部分句讀不同。此處只如實並列，不把句讀差異升格為義理差異。
二、如是知就是學
- 曼陀羅仙本：「法相如是。不知云何當學般若波羅蜜？」又答：「若能如是知諸法相，是名當學般若波羅蜜。」〔T08 0731a〕
- 僧伽婆羅本：「法相如是。不知云何當學般若波羅蜜？」又答：「若能如是知諸法相，是名學般若波羅蜜。」〔T08 0738a〕
兩本問句逐字相同，答句則有「當」字之差。曼陀羅仙本自身的「當」另有校記，見目八；兩譯差異誌錄如上，不作會通判定。
三、菩提自在三昧
- 曼陀羅仙本：「菩薩摩訶薩若欲學菩提自在三昧，得是三昧已，照明一切甚深佛法，及知一切諸佛名字，亦悉了達諸佛世界，無有障礙」〔T08 0731a·下文續〕
- 僧伽婆羅本：「菩薩摩訶薩若欲學菩提自在三昧，得是三昧已，照明一切甚深佛法，及知一切諸佛名字，亦悉了達諸佛世界，無有障礙」〔T08 0738a·下文續〕
此段六十餘字在兩本幾乎全同，足以坐實本單元核心問答的同段對讀；三昧之義仍只依經文所列功用，不另造定義。
三、經論宗依
本單元的經眼由佛答直接給出：「若能如是知諸法相，是名當學般若波羅蜜。」〔T08 0731a〕。這一句把文殊所問的『云何學』接回文殊剛才所陳的法相，不另立一個可取得的般若境界。經文隨即把修學指向菩提自在三昧，說得定後能照明甚深佛法、知諸佛名、達諸佛世界而無礙；本目只據本經兩答立眼，不以外論補造三昧義。
四、本章釋要
文殊先把一切可被執取的對待逐一放下：為與相、得與利、生與滅、來與去，以及知者、見者、作者。般若本身及其境界也不被另立為所見；證與不證、得與不得、生死與涅槃、思議與不思議、作與不作，同樣不被固定在一邊。文殊的難問因此不是『法相是什麼』，而是：法相既然不可被這些分別框住，學又如何成立。
佛沒有離開文殊的觀法另立一法，只說能如是知諸法相，就是學般若。接著提出菩提自在三昧，把學的作用說成照明甚深佛法、知諸佛名與了達諸佛世界無礙。其後的得名問答仍沿同一方向：般若無邊無際、無名無相、非思量，沒有歸依處與洲渚，沒有可執取的犯福與晦明，如法界而無分齊限數。
末後「非處非不行處」〔T08 0731a·下文續〕是底本難句，又牽涉「處／行」異讀。原典不據異本擅改，白話層依底本作貼近字面的轉述。文殊最後再問當云何行，表明本單元不以無念無作封住修行，而把問題推入下一段具體教說。
五、術語
| 術語 | 古德傳音／發音輔助 | 本章所給的義界 |
|---|---|---|
| 正法 | 無另列古德音寫可徵者從闕 | 文殊以無為無相等雙遮語觀察之法；本單元不另立一個可見的正法實體 |
| 般若波羅蜜 | 「般若」「波羅蜜」皆古德音寫；prajñāpāramitā 僅作發音輔助 | 佛答無邊無際、無名無相、非思量，如法界而無分齊限數；又名菩薩摩訶薩行處 |
| 菩提自在三昧 | 「菩提」「三昧」為古德音寫；bodhi、samādhi 僅作發音輔助 | 本單元只明其所得功用：照明甚深佛法、知諸佛名、達諸佛世界而無礙；不另造定義 |
| 行處 | 無另列古德音寫可徵者從闕 | 經以般若波羅蜜的異名列出，旋即以非處、非不行處及非行處遮止固定執取 |
| 一乘 | 無另列古德音寫可徵者從闕 | 與「悉入」連文，置於非行處的得名說明中；本單元不展開乘義判釋 |
以上羅馬字只作古德音寫的發音輔助，不以近代梵文校本作本單元文字出處。
六、譬喻
本單元沒有敘事性的自有譬喻。佛答中的「猶如法界，無有分齊，亦無限數」〔T08 0731a·下文續〕是一句比況，以法界的無分齊說般若之無邊際；經文所說無歸依、無洲渚，則是否定可供停靠、執取的所在。除此之外，未檢得古德以一則可逐字核對的傳統譬喻專釋本單元，故不移用別章之喻，也不為湊目另造譬喻。
七、徵引承衍
（一）《大寶積經》第四十六會的藏內承錄
《大寶積經》〈文殊說般若會第四十六之二〉承錄同一問答，其中有「菩薩摩訶薩若欲學菩提自在三昧」〔T11 0655b·下文續〕，下文續說得定後照明甚深佛法、知諸佛名、了達諸佛世界而無障礙。此處證明本單元隨第四十六會編入《大寶積經》的藏內傳承；只誌錄承錄，不據此裁定兩本先後或文字優劣。
（二）清代御錄的承錄
清胤禛錄《御錄經海一滴》立〈文殊師利所說摩訶般若波羅蜜經〉一節，於〔L164 0401a06–09〕承錄菩提自在三昧及照明甚深佛法、知佛名、達佛世界無礙之文。其題名與撰錄者已由該檔藏經目錄親核；此為清代藏內選錄見證，不當作古德對本句的義理注釋。
除此兩條藏內承錄外，截至本單元建置，未檢得古德對這四百一十五字另作可逐文核對的專門疏釋。本目因此止於已有實文，不借用一行三昧章的禪門徵引網填充本單元。
八、校本定位
- 底本：T08n0232〔0731a01–0731a22〕，共四百一十五字；原典層與 sealed span 逐字一致。
- 僧伽婆羅對讀：T08n0233〔0738a07–24〕；七組同序密聚長段共文強證成，本檔擇三組列示。
- 玄奘對讀：T07n0220 第七曼殊室利分；本單元未證成，誌錄即止，不引本文。
- 藏內承錄：T11n0310〔0655a25–0655b16〕；清胤禛錄 L164n1669〔0401a06–10〕。
- 〔T08 0731a11〕底本有「當」，宋、元、明、宮四本無；原書校記另記三本與宮本無。原典層依底本保留。
- 〔T08 0731a15〕「何以故」之「以」，宋、元、明、宮四本無；原書校記另記三本與宮本無。原典層依底本保留。
- 〔T08 0731a18〕「猶如法界」之「猶」，宋、元、明、宮四本無；原書校記另記三本與宮本無。原典層依底本保留。
- 〔T08 0731a19〕底本作「處」，宋、元、明、宮四本作「行」；原書校記另記三本與宮本作「行」。原典層保留底本「處」，白話不以異本靜默改寫。
1 · Classificatory Placement
Mañjuśrī’s Teaching of the Mahā-Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra has no chapter divisions. This unit is divided according to the sequence of dialogue in the base text. Its entire range is〔T08 0731a01–22〕and totals 415 characters. Mañjuśrī first contemplates the right Dharma through a succession of two-sided negations and then asks: since the marks of dharmas are like this, how should one learn prajñā? The Buddha answers that knowing the marks of all dharmas in this way is learning prajñā; if one wishes to learn the samādhi of mastery in awakening, one should likewise learn within the prajñā taught by Mañjuśrī. Mañjuśrī then asks why it is called prajñā-pāramitā. The Buddha replies that it has neither border nor limit, neither name nor mark, neither thought nor activity, and so forth. At the end Mañjuśrī brings the question to 『當云何行』— “How should one practice?” — directly leading into the next unit’s exchange on the single-practice samādhi.
The unit title 「云何修」— “How Should One Practice?” — is drawn from the sense of the final question 「當云何行」— “How should one practice?”
2 · Collation with Other Translations
(1) Strength of Evidence
The Saṅghabhara recension, T08n0233, yields seven long passages of shared wording in the same sequence within this unit. They are concentrated at〔T08 0738a07–24〕and each contains approximately thirty-five to sixty characters. The sense-unit parallel between this unit and that passage is therefore strongly established. This establishes only that the two passages can be read in parallel; it does not mean that the translations are identical word for word, nor does it directly establish that every doctrinal item is wholly the same.
Within this unit, Xuanzang’s Seventh Assembly, Mañjuśrī Division, in the Mahā-Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, T07n0220, yields only one exact verbal cue and does not meet the threshold of a dense cluster of two cues. This rubric therefore records the parallel as unestablished, does not quote Xuanzang’s text, and does not infer from the lack of establishment that a corresponding sense-unit must be absent.
(2) Three Sense-Unit Parallels
First: contemplating the right Dharma
- Mandrasena recension: 「我觀正法，無為無相，無得無利，無生無滅，無來無去，無知者、無見者、無作者。」〔T08 0731a〕
tr. “I contemplate the right Dharma as unconditioned and without marks, with nothing attained and nothing gained, without arising or ceasing, without coming or going, and with no knower, no seer, and no agent.” - Saṅghabhara recension: 「我觀正法，無為無相，無得無利，無生無滅，無去無來，無知者無見者無作者」〔T08 0738a·下文續〕
tr. “I contemplate the right Dharma as unconditioned and without marks, with nothing attained and nothing gained, without arising or ceasing, without going or coming, and with no knower, seer, or agent.” 〔The passage continues below.〕
The sequence of doctrinal items in the two texts is highly similar; the order of 「來去」— “coming and going” — and some punctuation differ. They are simply placed side by side here. Differences in punctuation are not elevated into doctrinal differences.
Second: knowing in this way is learning
- Mandrasena recension: 「法相如是。不知云何當學般若波羅蜜？」 and the reply: 「若能如是知諸法相，是名當學般若波羅蜜。」〔T08 0731a〕
tr. “Such are the marks of dharmas. I do not know how one should learn prajñā-pāramitā?” and “If one can know the marks of all dharmas in this way, this is called learning prajñā-pāramitā.” - Saṅghabhara recension: 「法相如是。不知云何當學般若波羅蜜？」 and the reply: 「若能如是知諸法相，是名學般若波羅蜜。」〔T08 0738a〕
tr. “Such are the marks of dharmas. I do not know how one should learn prajñā-pāramitā?” and “If one can know the marks of all dharmas in this way, this is called learning prajñā-pāramitā.”
The question is identical word for word in the two texts, while their answers differ by the character 「當」— “should.” The Mandrasena recension’s own 「當」 also carries a critical note, recorded in rubric 8. The difference between the two translations is recorded as it stands and is not doctrinally harmonized.
Third: the samādhi of mastery in awakening
- Mandrasena recension: 「菩薩摩訶薩若欲學菩提自在三昧，得是三昧已，照明一切甚深佛法，及知一切諸佛名字，亦悉了達諸佛世界，無有障礙」〔T08 0731a·下文續〕
tr. “If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva wishes to learn the samādhi of mastery in awakening, then after attaining this samādhi that bodhisattva will illuminate all profound Buddha-Dharmas, know the names of all Buddhas, and fully comprehend the worlds of all Buddhas without obstruction.” - Saṅghabhara recension: 「菩薩摩訶薩若欲學菩提自在三昧，得是三昧已，照明一切甚深佛法，及知一切諸佛名字，亦悉了達諸佛世界，無有障礙」〔T08 0738a·下文續〕
tr. “If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva wishes to learn the samādhi of mastery in awakening, then after attaining this samādhi that bodhisattva will illuminate all profound Buddha-Dharmas, know the names of all Buddhas, and fully comprehend the worlds of all Buddhas without obstruction.”
This passage of more than sixty characters is almost entirely identical in the two texts, securely establishing a same-passage parallel for the unit’s central exchange. The meaning of the samādhi remains restricted to the functions listed by the sūtra; no separate definition is invented.
3 · Scriptural and Treatise Ground
The scriptural eye of this unit is given directly by the Buddha’s reply: 「若能如是知諸法相，是名當學般若波羅蜜。」〔T08 0731a〕. tr. “If one can know the marks of all dharmas in this way, this is called learning prajñā-pāramitā.” This sentence connects Mañjuśrī’s question about how to learn back to the marks of dharmas he has just described and does not establish another realm of prajñā that can be attained. The sūtra immediately directs cultivation toward the samādhi of mastery in awakening, saying that after attaining the samādhi one can illuminate the profound Buddha-Dharmas, know the names of all Buddhas, and comprehend the worlds of all Buddhas without obstruction. This rubric establishes its eye only from the two replies within this sūtra and does not draw on an external treatise to construct another meaning of the samādhi.
4 · Essential Explanation of This Chapter
Mañjuśrī first relinquishes, one by one, every opposition that can be grasped: conditioning and marks, attainment and gain, arising and ceasing, coming and going, and knower, seer, and agent. Prajñā itself and its realm are likewise not established as what is seen. Realization and non-realization, attainment and non-attainment, birth-and-death and nirvāṇa, conceivable and inconceivable, and activity and non-activity are not fixed on either side. Mañjuśrī’s difficult question is therefore not “What are the marks of dharmas?” but this: since the marks of dharmas cannot be confined by these discriminations, how can learning be established?
The Buddha does not establish another dharma apart from Mañjuśrī’s contemplation. He says only that knowing the marks of all dharmas in this way is learning prajñā. He then introduces the samādhi of mastery in awakening and describes the functions of learning as illuminating the profound Buddha-Dharmas, knowing the names of all Buddhas, and comprehending the worlds of all Buddhas without obstruction. The ensuing exchange concerning the name continues in the same direction: prajñā has neither border nor limit, neither name nor mark, and is not an object of thought. It has no refuge or island, no offense or merit that can be grasped, and neither darkness nor light. Like the dharma-realm, it has no boundary or numerical limit.
The final phrase 「非處非不行處」— “neither a place nor a non-place of practice”〔T08 0731a·下文續〕is a difficult reading in the base text and is also connected to the variant 「處／行」— “place/practice.” The source-text layer does not alter the base text according to the variant. The vernacular layer renders the base text closely. Mañjuśrī’s final question about how one should practice shows that this unit does not use the absence of thought and activity to close off practice, but presses the question into the specific teaching that follows.
5 · Terms
| Term | Ancient transmitted sound / pronunciation aid | Scope supplied by this chapter |
|---|---|---|
| 正法 · right Dharma | No separately attested ancient transmitted transliteration; left blank | The Dharma contemplated by Mañjuśrī through such two-sided negations as unconditioned and without marks; this unit does not establish another visible entity called the right Dharma. |
| 般若波羅蜜 · prajñā-pāramitā | 「般若」 and 「波羅蜜」 are both ancient transmitted transliterations; prajñāpāramitā is supplied only as a pronunciation aid | The Buddha describes it as without border or limit, without name or mark, not an object of thought, and like the dharma-realm in having no boundary or numerical limit. It is also named the sphere of practice of a bodhisattva-mahāsattva. |
| 菩提自在三昧 · samādhi of mastery in awakening | 「菩提」 and 「三昧」 are ancient transmitted transliterations; bodhi and samādhi are supplied only as pronunciation aids | This unit states only its functions upon attainment: illuminating the profound Buddha-Dharmas, knowing the names of all Buddhas, and comprehending the worlds of all Buddhas without obstruction. It supplies no separate definition. |
| 行處 · sphere of practice | No separately attested ancient transmitted transliteration; left blank | The sūtra lists it as another name for prajñā-pāramitā, then immediately guards against fixing it through “neither a place nor a non-place of practice” and “non-place of practice.” |
| 一乘 · the one vehicle | No separately attested ancient transmitted transliteration; left blank | It occurs together with 「悉入」— “all enter” — in the explanation of the name “non-place of practice.” This unit does not expand it into a doctrinal classification of vehicles. |
The romanizations above are pronunciation aids for ancient transmitted transliterations only. No modern Sanskrit critical edition is made the textual source of this unit.
6 · Simile
This unit contains no narrative simile of its own. In the Buddha’s reply, 「猶如法界，無有分齊，亦無限數」〔T08 0731a·下文續〕— tr. “Like the dharma-realm, it has no boundary and no numerical limit” — is a comparison that explains the boundlessness of prajñā through the dharma-realm’s lack of boundary. The sūtra’s “no refuge and no island” further negates a place upon which one could rest or which one could grasp. Apart from this, no ancient master’s traditional simile devoted specifically to this unit has been found in a form that can be checked word for word. A simile from another chapter is therefore not moved here, nor is a new simile invented merely to fill the rubric.
7 · Citations and Onward Transmission
(1) Preservation in the Forty-Sixth Assembly of the Mahāratnakūṭa Sūtra
The forty-sixth assembly of the Mahāratnakūṭa Sūtra, “The Second Part of the Assembly on Mañjuśrī’s Teaching of Prajñā,” preserves the same exchange, including 「菩薩摩訶薩若欲學菩提自在三昧」〔T11 0655b·下文續〕. tr. “If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva wishes to learn the samādhi of mastery in awakening …” The passage continues by saying that after attaining the samādhi one illuminates the profound Buddha-Dharmas, knows the names of all Buddhas, and comprehends the worlds of all Buddhas without obstruction. This establishes that the present unit entered the scriptural transmission of the Mahāratnakūṭa Sūtra through the forty-sixth assembly. The preservation is recorded without deciding the chronological priority or textual superiority of the two versions.
(2) Preservation in the Qing Imperial Record
Imperial Record: A Drop from the Ocean of Sūtras, recorded by Yinzhen in the Qing, establishes a section titled 〈文殊師利所說摩訶般若波羅蜜經〉— “Mañjuśrī’s Teaching of the Mahā-Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra.” At〔L164 0401a06–09〕it preserves the following passage: 菩薩摩訶薩若欲學菩提自在三昧得是三昧已照明一切甚深佛法及知一切諸佛名字亦悉了達諸佛世界無有障礙當如文殊師利所說般若波羅密中學。 tr. “If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva wishes to learn the samādhi of mastery in awakening, then after attaining this samādhi that bodhisattva will illuminate all profound Buddha-Dharmas, know the names of all Buddhas, and fully comprehend the worlds of all Buddhas without obstruction. One should learn within the prajñā-pāramitā taught by Mañjuśrī.” Its title and the attribution 清 胤禛錄— “recorded by Yinzhen in the Qing” — are established by its canonical catalogue entry. This is a Qing witness preserving a selection within the canon; it is not treated as an ancient master’s doctrinal commentary on this sentence.
Apart from these two preservations within the canon, no ancient master’s specialized commentary devoted to these 415 characters has been found as a text that can be checked line by line. This rubric therefore stops with the texts that actually survive. It does not fill the unit by borrowing the Chan citation network belonging to the single-practice samādhi chapter.
8 · Witness Placement
- Base text: T08n0232〔0731a01–0731a22〕, totaling 415 characters; the source-text layer is identical word for word with the sealed span.
- Saṅghabhara parallel: T08n0233〔0738a07–24〕; seven long passages of densely shared wording in the same sequence strongly establish the parallel, of which three groups are displayed in this file.
- Xuanzang parallel: the Seventh Assembly, Mañjuśrī Division, in T07n0220; not established for this unit. The record stops there, and no passage is quoted.
- Preservation within the canon: T11n0310〔0655a25–0655b16〕; Qing, recorded by Yinzhen, L164n1669〔0401a06–10〕.
- At〔T08 0731a11〕the base text contains 「當」— “should”; the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Gong editions omit it. The source text’s critical note further records its absence from three editions and the Gong edition. The source-text layer retains the base reading.
- At〔T08 0731a15〕the base text’s 「何以故」 contains 「以」; the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Gong editions omit it. The source text’s critical note further records its absence from three editions and the Gong edition. The source-text layer retains the base reading.
- At〔T08 0731a18〕the base text’s 「猶如法界」 contains 「猶」; the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Gong editions omit it. The source text’s critical note further records its absence from three editions and the Gong edition. The source-text layer retains the base reading.
- At〔T08 0731a19〕the base text reads 「處」— “place”; the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Gong editions read 「行」— “practice.” The source text’s critical note further records that three editions and the Gong edition read 「行」. The source-text layer retains the base reading 「處」, and the vernacular does not silently rewrite it according to the variant.
Shi Huijing · Zhiyue · Mañjuśrī Prajñāpāramitā · How Should One Practice? · Apparatus · Summer 2026