Choo Hyun - Wonchuk's Commentary of The Heart Sutra

An English Translation
of the Banya paramilda

simgyeong chan:
Wonch'uk's Commentary
on the Heart S^tra
(Praj@2p2ramit2-h#daya-s^tra)
B. Hyun Choo1
This paper has attempted to present an English translation of

Wonch'uk's Banya paramilda simgyeong chan (般若波羅蜜多心經贊) or
Commentary on the Heart S^tra which was written in classical Chinese in the
7th century. As an example of the intellectual analysis of a s^tra, Wonch'uk's
Commentary is an important text that has exerted a significant influence on
East Asian Buddhist thought. A prominent Korean Yog2c2ra scholar,
Wonch'uk authored twenty-three works during his lifetime; unfortunately, all
but three have been lost. The Commentary on the Heart S^tra is the shortest
among his extant writings, yet it clearly reflects his incomparable erudition. It
is a unique commentarial work to examine the Buddhist meaning of emptiness
(s^nyat2) as it reflects the M2dhyamika doctrine of Emptiness from the
Yog2c2ra perspective.
B. Hyun Choo is a Lecturer of Department of Asian and Asian-American Studies at State

University of New York at Stony Brook, U.S.A.
International Journal of Buddhist Thought & Culture February 2006, Vol.6, pp.121-205.
ⓒ 2006 International Association for Buddhist Thought & Culture
122 B. Hyun Choo: An English Translation of the Banya paramilda
The English translation of Wonch'uk's original Chinese text may offer

the contemporary readers in the West an opportunity to reveal the distinctive
features of Wonch'uk's Commentary as well as an East Asian scriptural
exegesis.
Key Words: Wonch'uk, Banya paramilda simgyeong chan, Essence,

Doctrine, Three Wheels of Dharma, Three natures of existence, The
nature of Emptiness.
I. Introduction
The Banya paramilda simgyeong chan (般若波羅蜜多心經贊)1 is a

commentary on the Heart S^tra written in classical Chinese by the 7th
century Buddhist exegete Wonch'uk. An excellent example of the
intellectual analysis of a s^tra, it is an important text that has exerted a
significant influence in the history of East Asian Buddhist thought.
Wonch'uk (圓測, 613-696 C.E.), also known as Reverend Moon-A
of His-ming Monastery (西明寺) in China, was originally from Silla,
Korea.2 (Koh, 1999:13-14) An eminent disciple of Hsüan-tsang (玄奘),3
and an older contemporary of K'uei-chi (窺基) of the Chinese Fa-hsiang
School (法相宗), he is considered one of the most prominent Yog2c2ra
scholars.4 According to his biographical source, Wonch'uk authored
1 According to Dr. Nguyen, the Chinese term “chan (贊)” means “eulogy” rather than
“commentary,” so this work should be titled as “Eulogy on the Heart S^tra”; yet it in no way
resembles the s^tra style in Indian Buddhist literature, but is rather merely a commentary.
Nguyen notes that this has significant implications on how Wonch'uk views the status of the
Heart S^tra (Nguyen, 2001:24-25).
2 Wonch'uk moved to T'ang China at the age of fifteen and never returned to Korea (Kim &
Wu, 1976:70).
3 Chang-geun Hwang, in his dissertation, investigates the relationship between Hsüan-tsang and
Wonch'uk. According to Hwang, The Encyclopedic Biographies of Hsüan-tsang and His Disciples (玄
奘三藏師資伝叢書) Wonch'uk is mentioned as the disciple of Hsüan-tsang, whereas other
records state that Hsüan-tsang studied old Yog2c2ra from both Fa-ch'ang and Seng-pien as did
Wonch'uk and, therefore, the relationship between the two could be defined as peers or fellow
students of the two masters rather than as master and disciple (Hwang, 2000:41).
4 According to Sung-fu (宋復), Wonch'uk was highly respected by Empress Wu (測天武后, c.684‐
705) of T'ang China, so that even though the King of Silla, Korea, Sin‐Moon (神文王, c.681‐
International Journal of Buddhist Thought & Culture 123
twenty-three works, in 108 volumes, during his lifetime, though all but
three have been lost. Chinese resistance to scholarship by a Korean
monk-scholar may be to blame for this poor survival rate; there are
indications that Wonch'uk's status as a non-Chinese disciple under
Hsüan-tsang was somewhat unstable (Oh, 1991:120). The three extant
works are: the Commentary on the Heart S^tra (般若心經贊, Banya
paramilda simgyeong chan), which is the first commentary on
Hsüan-tsang's translation of the Heart S^tra; the Commentary on the
Sa8dhinirmocana-s^tra (解深密經疏, Hae sim-mil gyeong so), which is the
largest extant commentary on that s^tra—called “the Great Chinese
Commentary” by the eminent Tibetan Buddhist scholars, Tsong kha pa;
and the Commentary on the Benevolent King S^tra (仁王般若經疏, Inwang
banya gyeong so).5 (Powers, 1992:19) Although the Commentary on the
Heart S^tra is the shortest among his extant writings, Wonch'uk's
encyclopedic knowledge of Buddhist literature is contained in it; it is, in
Powers' words, “a massive compendium of Buddhist scholarship”
(Powers, 1992:9). A close reading of his Commentary not only leads us to
more deeply understand many essential teachings of the Heart S^tra, but
also reminds us that s^tra study and the engagement in s^tra exegesis
are principal religious practices in Buddhism.
1. The Heart S^tra
The Heart S^tra (Praj@2p2ramit2-h#daya-s^tra) is undoubtedly one of

the most important Mah2y2na scriptures, particularly in China, Korea
692) petitioned for his return to his homeland, the Empress would not allow it. In addition,
when eminent Indian monks came to T'ang, Empress Wu allowed Wonch'uk not only to
receive them but also to help them with their projects of s^tra translations (Sung-fu,
No.150:91-92; Hwang, 2000:31).
5 According to Hwang, the list of non-extant Wonch'uk texts, which are mentioned in various
bibliographies including the Ui‐cheon mok-rok (義天目錄), are: the Seong yu‐sik ron so (成唯識
論疏), the Seong yu‐sik ron byeol-jan (成唯識論別章), the I‐sip yu‐sik (ron) so (二十唯識論疏),
the Baek-beop ron so (百法論疏), the Gwang baek ron so (廣百論疏), the Mu-ryang-ui gyeong so (無
量義經疏), the Gwan so-yeon-yeon ron so (觀所緣緣論疏), the Yuk-sip igyeon jang (六十二見章),
the In-myeong jeong-ri-mun ron so (因明正理門論疏), the A-mi-ta gyeong so (阿彌陀經疏), the Yu‐
ga ron so (瑜伽論疏), the Gu‐sa ron‐seok song so (舍舍論釋頌), the Mu-ryang-su-gyeong so (無量
壽經疏), the Seong yu-sik eun cho (成唯識應鈔), the Seong yu-sik gwang cho (成唯識光鈔), the
Geumgang banya gyeong so (金剛般若經) (Hwang, 2000:120-123).
and Japan. According to Edward Conze, it was composed around 350

C.E. and is considered the shortest version of the voluminous Perfection
of Wisdom s^tras (Praj@2p2ramit2-h#daya-s^tras),6 comprising only two
hundred and sixty two Chinese characters. Nevertheless, it contains not
only the essence of the entire Praj@2p2ramit2-h#daya-s^tras but also the
entire Mah2y2na teaching. The Heart S^tra is especially emphasized in
the Ch'an tradition, since it formulates the teaching of emptiness
($^nyat2) in a particularly clear and concise way.
Considered the word of the Buddha,7 the Heart S^tra focuses on
the concept of emptiness ($^nyat2); that all phenomena, including
human suffering, are without self-nature (svabh2va) because they arise
due to causes and conditions. The s^tra also discusses the realization of
emptiness; that one is able to eradicate all attachment to the self and
dharmas, and thus to liberate the self from suffering. In contrast to the
early Buddhist scriptures of the Nik2ya tradition, which focus on the
existence of permanent selfhood, the Heart S^tra proclaims the true
meaning of the emptiness of existence as the spiritual breakthrough
necessary to actualize enlightenment.
The core passage of the Heart S^tra is “Form is not different from
emptiness; emptiness is not different from form, and form is emptiness,
emptiness is form.” As Lopez points out, it may be “at once the most
celebrated and problematic passage in the text” (Lopez,
1988:8). Nevertheless, when understood, insight into the empty nature of
all phenomena leads to the Perfection of Wisdom (Praj@2p2ramit2) as the
Middle Way. The s^tra addresses the major categories of Buddhist
teaching, i.e., the five aggregates, dependent origination, the Four Noble
Truths, and, through the series of negations, the essence of the doctrine
of emptiness.
6 According to Conze, Praj@2p2ramit2-s^tras, also known as “Perfection of Wisdom s^tras,” originated

in the first centuries B.C.E and C.E., and expanded from 8,000 lines, in the oldest text, to
100,000 lines. Later, along with the shorter versions of the two most famous s^tras, the
Diamond s^tra (Vajracchedika-praj@2p2ramit2-s^tra) and the Heart s^tra (Praj@2p2ramit2-h#daya-s^tra),
under the influence of tantric modes of thought, the “Perfection of Wisdom in a Few Words,”
which was designed as a counterpart to the Heart S^tra, was also composed (Conze,
1978:11,15).
7 Although it was not preached directly by the Buddha but by Avalokite$vara, who is a
manifestation of the Buddha, the Heart S^tra is considered the Buddha's word (Lopez, 1988:5).
Within the Mah2y2na doctrinal classification, the Heart S^tra

belongs to the Buddha's Second turning of the Wheel, the Emptiness
period of Dharma, and most extant commentaries approach it from the
perspective of the M2dhyamika doctrine of the Emptiness period (Chung,
1977:87). However, Wonch'uk interprets the Heart S^tra from the
Yog2c2ra perspective, and his Commentary therefore offers the reader a
unique opportunity to examine the M2dhyamika doctrine of emptiness
from the Yog2c2ra perspective.
2. The characteristics of Wonch'uk's Commentary on the Heart S^tra
The most distinctive feature of Wonch'uk's Commentary lies in his

scholarly foundation, which is rooted in the Buddha's “One vehicle
(Ekay2na)”, implying non-dualism, non-discrimination, and
non-sectarianism. Wonch'uk criticizes the sectarian dogmatism of
Chinese Buddhism8 and attempts to harmonize the complete corpus of
Mah2y2na doctrine. On the one hand, he thoroughly investigates
different views; on the other hand, he explains how the variant
perspectives described in his text can actually be viewed as
complementing one another. As his methodological instruments,
Wonch'uk utilizes the Buddhist principles of skillful means and the
Middle Way, as well as the East Asian hermeneutic concept of t'i-yung
(essence-function), which he uses to integrate and harmonize sectarian
views.9
In his Commentary, Wonch'uk employs the standard style of
exegesis within the East Asian Buddhist tradition. His treatment of the
s^tra is divided into the four traditional topics: (1) the causes and
conditions that gave rise to the teaching; (2) a differentiation of the
essence and doctrine of the s^tra; (3) an explanation of the title of the
8 In Chinese Buddhist tradition, along with the process of systemization and evaluation, while
processing the translation and interpretation of the original Sanskrit Buddhist texts into
Chinese, various groups splintered off into different sects, each of which upheld its own basic
texts and doctrines as superior to others. Among these schools several, including the T'ien-tai,
Hua-yen, Fa-hsiang, and Ch'an schools, developed their own system of doctrinal classification.
9 Views held by the H6nay2na (i.e., the Sarv2stiv2da and Sautr2ntika) and Mah2y2na (i.e.,
M2dhyamika and Yog2c2ra: Old and New Chinese Yog2c2ra).
s^tra; (4) and an interpretation of the s^tra by analyzing its textual

content. The first two topics conduct the reader in locating the s^tra
within the overall hermeneutical context of Buddhist doctrines, while the
second two attempt both linguistical and conceptual analysis of the
s^tra, drawing on various Buddhist texts.
In discussing causes and conditions that gave rise to the teaching,
his first topic, Wonch'uk adopts the Yog2c2ra classification of the Three
Wheels of Dharma10 elucidated in The Scripture on the Explication of
Underlying Meaning (Sa8dhinirmocana-s^tra). According to the
Sa8dhinirmocana-s^tra, during his career the Buddha, using his skillful
means, turned the wheel of Dharma three times in response to the
different inclinations and spiritual capacities of his audiences
(T.16.693c-697c; Keenan, 2000:35-50). With the first turning of the
Dharma-wheel the Buddha taught the Four Noble Truths (四聖諦,
2ry2satya) to the disciples ($r2vakas), using the illustrations of birth and
death, cause and effect, and nirv2!a and sa8s2ra to lead those who had
not yet entered the dharma to enter it. However, since this Dharma
focused on “existence”, it allowed the erroneous grasping at the self or
dharmas taught by the early schools, which claimed to be the true
interpreters of the Buddha's word (Skilton, 1994:122).
The grasping at existence in the first Dharma, which occasioned
controversy and had to be interpreted, was counteracted by the second
teaching, which consisted of the Perfection of Wisdom doctrine,
emphasizing “nonexistence” or “the emptiness of self-nature (svabh2va)”
(Conze, 1973:150). The second Dharma, given to the bodhisattvas of the
Mah2y2na tradition, taught that “all things have no essence, no arising,
and no passing away, and are essentially in cessation” (T.16.697a;
Keenan, 2000:49). Based on the Perfection of Wisdom s^tras
(Praj@2p2ramit2-s^tras), this teaching was formulated by N2g2rjuna of the
M2dhyamika school to counter the view that things have an intrinsic
self-nature. However, according to the Sa8dhinirmocana-s^tra, it also
occasioned controversy and had to be interpreted.
10 The Three Wheels of Dharma are “all-encompassing modalities of Buddha's teachings from the
perspective of both time and tenets.”
Finally, the third wheel of the Dharma explained the truth of both
existence and nonexistence for all three vehicles. Formulated by the
Yog2c2ra school, this teaching emphasized the affirmation of existence or
self in order to present a deeper understanding of the meaning of
emptiness. It accepted the conventional existence of phenomena and
focused on the primacy of mind and its role in perception. The
Sa8dhinirmocana-s^tra expounds that this Dharma is “the universal and
supreme teaching of the Buddha and it did not contain any implicit
meaning nor occasion any controversy” (T.16.697a; Keenan, 2000:49).
Thus, the Yog2c2ra school presents this Dharma as a final resolution of
the Buddha's teaching. The Yog2c2ra school serves as an antidote to the
M2dhyamika, which can lead to a misplaced belief that things do not
exist, as well as to other extreme views. It considers earlier Buddhist
schools to have been confined to this kind of extremism during the first
Dharma (Skilton, 1994:122). The interpretation of the three wheels of
Dharma in the Sa8dhinirmocana-s^tra implies that in the third Dharma
the Yog2c2ra school succeeded the M2dhyamika school and appropriated
the significance of its doctrines.
Unlike most Chinese sectarian scholars, who view the classification
of the Three Wheels of Dharma as a means of ranking doctrines and
proving their school's superiority, Wonch'uk does not limit himself to
his own school's point of view; rather, he sees the problem in terms of
the skillful means of the Buddha.11 He regards the three Dharmas as
equally important, and emphasizes that the eighty-four thousand
11 According to Nguyen, the Samdhinirmocana-s^tra states that the first two wheels of Dharma are
of interpretable meaning (neyarthha) whereas the third is of definitive meaning (nitartha)
(T.16.697b). Yog2c2ra school regards the Samdhinirmocana-s^tra, which is the third wheel of
Dharma, as a definitive teaching because it uses the doctrine of three natures to thoroughly
explain Buddhist doctrines from the perspective of both nonexistence and existence.
Wonch'uk's contemporary K'uei‐chi of the Fa‐hsiang School designated the definitive
meaning of the third wheel of Dharma as the supreme teaching. Yet, as opposed to K'uei‐chi's
claim, Wonch'uk argues that whether a teaching is interpretable or definitive does not depend
on the degree of profundity of the teaching expounded but on whether it is “manifest” or
“hidden.” In his commentary on the Samdhinirmocana-s^tra, he elaborates that the first wheel of
Dharma manifests existence and keeps nonexistence hidden; the second wheel of Dharma
manifests nonexistence and keeps existence hidden; the third wheel of Dharma completely and
explicitly manifests both existence and nonexistence. In addition, if within either wheel both
existence and nonexistence are manifest through analysis, a Dharma wheel is of definitive
meaning; if they are not sufficiently analyzed and are hidden, a doctrine is of interpretable
meaning (Nguyen, 2001:31).
teachings in all s^tras are not of a hierarchical order but correspond to

the different needs of sentient beings.12 From this perspective, Wonch'uk
attempts to integrate and harmonize different views including the
difference between the M2dhyamika and Yog2c2ra doctrines. For instance,
in his Commentary, Wonch'uk explains that the discernment of existence
and emptiness in the Yog2c2ra theory of the Three Natures reaffirms
N2g2rjuna's Middle Way.
Wonch'uk's second topic is the difference between the essence and
the doctrine of the Heart S^tra, a relationship he explicates in terms of
the hermeneutic device of essence (t'i) and function (yung). He defines
the t'i (體) as the core of the Buddha's actual teachings and the
doctrine (宗, tsung) as that which has been expounded by the various
Buddhist schools. First, Wonch'uk points out that the explications of the
Buddha's teaching provided by the various schools are not the same; for
instance, some of the early schools13 view the sound of the s^tra as t'i,
while one of the M2dhyamika schools validates only sound, and yet
another combines sound with name, phrase, and syllable. However, he
argues that each of these teachings is based on the same truth, and
therefore does not contradict the others.14 Second, Wonch'uk
differentiates the various doctrines in accordance with illnesses,
scriptures, and periods, but nevertheless, on the basis of the Buddha's
One Mind (一心), views them as different means of leading people to
enlightenment.
In his third and fourth topics, which are the linguistic and
conceptual analysis of the s^tra, Wonch'uk begins with a detailed
12 The original text states: 八萬四千諸塵勞門。是故如來應病設藥。蘊等八萬四千法門由此一一隨其所

應。… (T.33.543a25-27).
13 The doctrines of both the Sarv2stiv2da and Sautr2ntika schools view sound as the essence of
the Buddha's teaching “since names, phrases, and syllables do not exist independently apart
from sound” (T.33.543a9-11).
14 Wonch'uk explains in his commentary: “When [one] follows the real by means of the
provisional, [one] uses sound as the essence [of communication] since, apart from sound,
name, phrase, [and syllable] would not be distinguishable; when [one] follows the function [of
communication] by means of the essence, names, etc. are considered the essence that can
communicate the distinctions between the self-natures of all dharmas and hence these two are
depended upon. The provisional and the real require each other; their interaction is called
essence” (T.33.543a16-20).
explanation of the title; then he divides the s^tra into three parts. As
he sees it, the first part, from “Kuan-zizai Bodhisattva … ” to “He
crosses over all sufferings and calamities,” illustrates the contemplating
wisdom; the second part, from “Ś2riputra … ” to “there is no wisdom
and no attainment,” illustrates the cognitive-object contemplated; the
third part, from “because there is no attainment … ” to the end,
illustrates the fruit attained. The parts, sections, divisions and segments
that Wonch'uk delineates eventually lead to multiple levels of
subheadings, so that even a small portion of the text becomes
thoroughly involved in the broader interpretation which he establishes
for the whole.15 His multi-leveled structure of the Heart S^tra can be
mapped out as follows:
1. Illustrating the contemplating wisdom:
a) Indicating the contemplating person

“Kuan-zizai Bodhisattva”
b) Illustrating the contemplating wisdom
(1) The essence of the contemplating wisdom;
“performs profoundly the Perfection of Wisdom”
(2) The function of the contemplating wisdom;
“[the Bodhisattva] illuminatingly sees that the five
aggregates are all empty” --i) personal aims
“and crosses over all sufferings and calamities” --ii)
altruistic aims
2. Illustrating the cognitive-object contemplated:
a) Illustrating the nature of emptiness

(1) Indicating the person who is guided; “Ś2riputra,”
(2) Illustrating the nature of emptiness
(2a) explaining the four statements by means of the
15 According to Robert Buswell this is a quint essentially East Asian form, deriving ultimately
from indigenous exegitical traditions rather than Indian Buddhist models (Buswell, 2002:125).
aggregate of form;
“form is not different from emptiness, emptiness is
not different from form, and form is emptiness, emptiness is form.”
(2b) interpreting that the other four aggregates all
contain the four statements;
“The same is true with sensation, perception,
mental formation, and consciousness.”
b) Illustrating the characteristics of emptiness
(1) Revealing the characteristics of emptiness by means of
the six meanings;
“Ś2riputra, in that way, the characteristics of emptiness
in all dharmas are neither originated nor annihilated, neither defiled nor
purified, neither increasing nor decreasing.”
(2) Dispelling the attachment to the six teachings of dharma
based on the characteristics of emptiness;
(2a) dispelling the attachment to the teaching on the five
aggregates;
“Therefore, in emptiness there is no form,
sensation, perception, mental formation, nor consciousness.”
(2b) dispelling the teaching on the twelve sense bases;
“There is no eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind; no
form, sound, smell, taste, touchable, nor object of mind.”
(2c) dispelling the teaching on the eighteen realms;
“There is no eye‐realm and, in this way, up to no
realm of mind‐consciousness.”
(2d) dispelling the teaching on the twelve limbs of
dependent origination;
“There is no origination of ignorance, no extinction
of ignorance, and, in this way, no origination of aging and death, and
no extinction of aging and death.”
(2e) dispelling the teaching on the Four Noble Truths;
“There is no suffering, origination [of suffering],
cessation [of suffering] or path [leading to liberation].”
(2f) dispelling the teaching on wisdom and abandonment;
“There is no wisdom and no attainment.”
3. Revealing the fruit attained:
a) Clarifying the fruit attained

(1) Illustrating the power of contemplation;
“Because there is no attainment, the bodhisattvas depend
on the Perfection of Wisdom and, therefore,
their minds are free from [mental] obstructions.“
(2) Revealing the fruit attained;
“Because [bodhisattvas] have no [mental] obstructions,
they are without fear, free from perverted views and dreamlike
thoughts, and achieve ultimate nirv2!a.”
b) Demonstrating achievement by examples
(1) Elucidating the fruit attained;
“The Buddhas of the three times, [past, present, and
future,] attain supreme, perfect enlightenment through relying on the
Perfection of Wisdom.”
(2) Praising the excellence of the Perfection of Wisdom by
means of its function
(2a) Interpreting the prose in detail;
“Therefore, one should know the Perfection of
Wisdom as the great sacred mantra, the great illuminating mantra, the
supreme mantra, and the unequaled mantra.” --i) elucidating the self‐
benefit.
“It can eliminate all sufferings, for it is true, not
false.” --ii) illustrating the benefit to others.
(2b) Concluding the praise in eulogy
“Therefore, [the Kuan-zizai Bodhisattva] speaks the
Praj@2p2ramit2 mantra: gate gate p2ragate p2rasamgate bodhi sv2h2.”
Within this structure, Wonch'uk establishes his Commentary by

referencing other scriptures, minimizing any significant input of his
own. His discussion is closely tied to his textual sources, while utilizing
a methodology that relies on piecing together quotations from a wide

array of sources.16 He refers to many different doctrines, i.e., the early
Buddhist doctrines of the Sarv2stiv2da and Sautr2ntika and the Mah2y2na
doctrines of the M2dhyamika and Yog2c2ra, including the Old and New
Yog2c2ra; he uses 125 references from forty different s^tras and $2stras.17
In doing so, Wonch'uk not only explains and elaborates on various
Buddhist terms and concepts, but also relates the scripture to the
entirety of Buddhism. For his most frequent citations, such as the
Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun (成唯識論), the Buddhabh^mi-s^tra-$2stra (佛地經論),
the Madhyamakak2rik2 (中論), and the Trim$atik2 (唯識三十頌), I rely on
other English translations which have already been published. (For
example, for the Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun, I refer to the Three Texts on
Consciousness Only, translated by Francis H. Cook; for the
Buddhabh^mi-s^tra-$2stra, to The Interpretation of the Buddha Land by John
P. Keenan.)
It is a nearly overwhelming task to traverse time and space to
translate Wonch'uk's seventh century Chinese into current English. In
his essay “The Task of the Translator,” Walter Benjamin states that “A
real translation is transparent; it does not cover the original, does not
block its light, but allows the pure language which survives
in different times and places and proves to possess an uncanny sustaining
power” (Benjamin, 1939). Indeed, Benjamin's understanding illumines
the Buddhist distinction between “live words (活句)” and “dead words
(死句)”; words without meaning or words that are not attended with
functioning are considered “dead words”, whereas “live words” are alive
because they constantly live in the mind and bodies of people.
16 Wonch'uk analytically dissects, section by section and word by word, the vast array of
teachings and doctrines appearing in the text as a way of illustrating the diversity and
originality of Buddhist doctrinal teachings.
17 These include the Avalokite$vara-s^tra (Kuan-yin san-mei ching, 觀音三昧經), the Sha-men lun (沙
門論), the Tsan‐fo lun (讚佛論), the Buddhabh^mi-s^tra-$2stra (佛地經論), the Śrama!a-$2stra, the
Yog2c2rabh^mi-$2stra (瑜伽師地論), the Abhidharmako$2bh2sya (阿毘達磨俱舍論), the
Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun (成唯識論), the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra (佛地論) the M2dhyamika-k2rik2 (中論), the
Samdhinirmocana-s^tra (解深密經), the Pram2!a-samuccaya (集量論), the Abhidharmasamuccaya (雜集
論), the Śr62mal2dev6-s^tra, the Mah2y2na-S^trala8k2ra (大乘莊嚴論經), the Trim$atik2 (唯識三十頌),
the Mah2y2nasa8graha-$2stra (攝大乘論), the Madhy2ntavibh2ga (辯中邊論), and the
Suvar@a-prabh2sa-s^tra (金光明經), etc.
Wonch'uk, through his commentarial work, attempts to make the Word

of the Buddha come alive in the present. In the same way, it is my
challenge as translator to ensure that Wonch'uk's words come alive to
contemporary readers in the West. This English translation of
Wonch'uk's Commentary on the Heart S^tra attempts to demonstrate that
something universal and eternal, “the pure language”, remains alive
today.
II. An English translation of the Banya paramilda simgyeong chan
佛說般若波羅蜜多心經贊
A Commentary on the Buddha's Heart Sūtra (Prajñāpāramitā-hṛdaya-sūtra)
沙門測撰
Written by Buddhist monk Wonch'uk
[Introduction]
In interpreting the [Heart] s^tra, four aspects may be

differentiated:
[A.] the causes and conditions that gave rise to this teaching;
[B.] differentiating the essence (體, t'i) and doctrine (宗, tsung) of
the s^tra;
[C.] explaining the title [of the s^tra];
[D.] and interpreting the s^tra by analyzing its textual content.
[A.] The causes and conditions that gave rise to this teaching
I propose humbly that the perfect principle, mysterious and calm,

wondrously cuts off the realms of existence and nonexistence. The
characteristics of dharmas are extremely profound and able to transcend
the superficial [expressions] of names and words. Yet this principle does
not perform in fixed ways, so [the Buddha] expressed it in the two
scriptures [of H6nay2na and Mah2y2na]. The actualizing of the response

of the three bodies is the foundation on which the teaching is
expounded. [In other words,] it could be said that when the spring
water becomes clear, the reflection of the moon suddenly appears, and
with the enemy's slightest move in the dark, the heavenly drum
spontaneously beats itself. Yet, when responding to objects [at the
conventional level], according to their abilities, the Tath2gata expounds
the Three Wheels of Dharma to guide [sentient beings].
In order to guide those who have not yet entered the Dharma to
enter it, at the Deer Park (M#gad2va) in Varanasi, [the Buddha] first
unfolded the cause and effect of sa8s2ra and nirv2!a. This was the First
Wheel of Dharma, [the teaching of] the Four Noble Truths. So that
those who already were able to eliminate attachment to the view of self
would be converted to Mah2y2na, on sixteen occasions, including at the
Vulture Peak (Mount G#dhrak^%a), etc., [the Buddha] expounded the
Praj@2p2ramit2-s^tra. This was the Second Wheel of Dharma, [the
teaching of] “No‐characteristics.” Although [followers of the Second
Wheel of Dharma] gradually eliminate attachment to the view that
dharmas have their own natures, they still remain unable to dispel
attachment to emptiness itself. So, [the Tath2gata] expounds the Third
Wheel, which is the definitive (n6t2rtha) Mah2y2na teaching of the
Sa8dhinirmocana-s^tra, in the Pure and Impure Lands of the Lotus
Flower Treasury Worlds (Padm2garbh2lok2dh2tu). [This Third teaching]
reveals the principle of both emptiness and existence, and eliminates
the two forms of extremist attachments to existence and nonexistence.
This is exactly what gave rise to the teaching [of the Heart S^tra].
[B.] Differentiating the essence (t'i) and the doctrine (tsung) [of
the sūtra]
“Essence” refers to the core of the teachings that can be

expounded with comprehensive clarity, whereas “doctrine” discloses the
specifics of what have been expounded by the various teachings.
However, the explications of the essence of the Buddha's teaching [given
by various schools] are not the same. The Sarv2stiv2da school regards
sound as the essence, because name, [phrase, and syllable] are neutral
while sound is wholesome. According to the Sautr2ntika school, the
series [of names, phrases, and syllables] is provisionally designated as
“sounds”, since names, phrases, [and syllables] do not exist
independently apart from sound. The doctrines of the Mah2y2na schools
[regarding the essence of the Buddha's teaching] are [also] not the
same. A place [in the Mah2y2na scripture] claims only sound [for the
essence of the teaching]; for example, the Vimalak6rti-nirde$an2-s^tra
states that there is a certain buddha land in which sound becomes [the
essential element of] the affairs of buddha. Another place takes only
name, [phrase, and syllable] as the essence [of the teaching]; for
instance, the Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun states that the object of unobstructed
cognition of dharma is considered to be name, [phrase, and syllable].
Another place [in the Mah2y2na text] combines the [above] explanations
of both sound and name, [phrase, and syllable]; for example, the
Da$abh^mikas^tra-$2stra states that one who listen to [the Buddha's
teaching] depends on two things, namely, sound and name, [phrase,
and syllable].
Why are there such differences between these doctrines? To
definitively grasp the real, one follows the real by means of the
provisional. [While we] all use sound and name, [phrase, and syllable]
in order to [understand] the nature of the essence, nevertheless, each of
these holy teachings is based on one meaning and therefore does not
contradict the others. Why is this so? When [one] follows the real by
means of the provisional, [one] uses sound as the essence [of
communication] since name, phrase, [and syllable] would not be
distinguishable apart from sound. When [one] follows the function [of
communication] by means of the essence, name, [phrase, and syllable]
are considered the essence that can communicate the distinctions
between the self-natures of all dharmas. Thus these two are [both]
depended upon. The provisional and the real require each other; their
interaction is called “essence.” To try to follow one [without the other]
would be a mistake, and an explanation [in that way] would not make
any sense. When one follows the mind by means of a cognitive object,
one uses consciousness as the essence. Therefore, the s^tras [of the
Third Wheel of Dharma] state that since all dharmas do not exist apart
from consciousness, when one recovers the ultimate truth by embracing
the illusion, one uses suchness as the essence. This is how the
Benevolent Kings Perfection of Wisdom S^tra describes the nature of all
dharmas.
The doctrines of what have been expounded may be outlined
using three categories: (1) specifying doctrines in accordance with
illnesses [of sentient beings]; (2) disclosing doctrines according to
specific scriptures; (3) differentiating doctrines according to periods.
(1) Specifying doctrines in accordance with illnesses [of sentient
beings]: All sentient beings, due to ignorance, give rise to eighty-four
thousand countless [kinds of] defilements including desire, anger, etc.
So the Tath2gata prescribes medicines according to [their] illnesses, that
is, the eighty-four thousand [kinds of] Dharma teachings, including [the
teaching of five] aggregates. In this way, each of what is responded to
by these [illnesses,] such as [the teachings of the five] aggregates
(skandhas), [the twelve] bases (2yatana), [and the eighteen] elements
(dh2tu), etc., become the doctrines of what have been expounded.
(2) Disclosing doctrines according to specific scriptures: Although
every scripture contains various teachings, when examining the main
focus [of the scripture], each [doctrine] is differentiated in accordance
with scripture. For instance, for the Lotus S^tra, [the concept of] “One
vehicle (Ekay2na)” is [its] doctrine; for the Vimalak6rti-nirde$an2-s^tra, [the
notion of] “Non-duality” is [its] doctrine; according to the
Mah2parinirv2!a-S^tra, the “Buddha nature” is [its] doctrine; and for the
Avata8saka-S^tra, “the cause and effect of Saints” is [its] doctrine. [The
doctrines of] other scriptures may be understood as above.
(3) Distinguishing doctrines according to periods: Although the
scriptures of holy teaching are divided into a variety [of doctrines],
from the perspective of period, they are distinguished by no more than
three kinds [of doctrines]: those are, according to the
Sa8dhinirmocana-s^tra, the Four [Noble] Truths, No-characteristic, and
the definitive meaning of Mah2y2na. Now, for this scripture, [the Heart
S^tra,] among these [three] doctrines, “No-characteristic” is [its]
doctrine.
[C.] Explaining the title of the sūtra
佛說般若波羅蜜多心經
“The Buddha expounds the Prajñāpāramitā-hṛdaya-Sūtra.”
In explaining the title [of the s^tra], “the Buddha expounds”

indicates the person who is able to expound. The Sanskrit word
“buddha” is translated into “the awakened”, one who is equipped with
both ultimate and worldly wisdom, who has accomplished enlightenment
for both oneself and others, and who is, hence, a “buddha.” That [the
Buddha] expounds the wondrous teaching and causes sentient beings to
understand is called to “expound.” “Praj@2p2ramit2” denotes the dharma
which is expounded and is translated into “Wisdom by which [one can]
arrive at the other shore (nirv2!a)” in the [Chinese] language. The Heart
S^tra (H#daya-S^tra) correctly reveals the teaching that can be
expounded. Among the organs of the body, the heart [or mind] is the
foremost, and among the Praj@2p2ramit2-s^tras, this teaching is the most
precious. The name [of the s^tra] is established by following the
metaphor, and therefore it is called the “Heart [S^tra].”
“S^tra” has a twofold meaning: to penetrate and to embrace. It
means to penetrate into the meanings of [all] the doctrines to be
communicated and to embrace all sentient beings that are to be saved.
This is a dependent determinative compound (tatpuru4a), concerning
both the teachings that can be expounded and what has been
expounded. The title is established by means of the dharma and the
metaphor and, therefore, it is said that “The Buddha expounds the
Praj@2p2ramit2-h#daya-S^tra.”
[D.] Interpreting the sūtra by analyzing its textual content

觀自在菩薩
“Kuan-zizai (Avalokiteśvara) Bodhisattva”
The Heart [S^tra] is generally divided into three parts: The first
part, [from “Kuan‐zizai Bodhisattva … .” to “crosses over all sufferings
and calamities]” clarifies the contemplating wisdom; the second part,
from “Ś2riputra … ” [to “there is no wisdom, no attainment”] illustrates
the cognitive-object contemplated; the last part, from “because there is
no attainment” [to the end] reveals the fruit attained. There is no
introduction or conclusion in this [s^tra]. Since [this text] selects the
essential outlines from all the Praj@2p2ramit2-s^tras, it has only the main
chapter, without introduction and conclusion, just as the Kuan-yin ching
(Avalokite$vara-s^tra) is not composed of three sections.
[1. Illustrating the contemplating wisdom]

[a) Indicating the contemplating person]
As for the “Kuan-zizai Bodhisattva”, the first part of [the s^tra],

[that is, from “Kuan-zizai Bodhisattva … .” to “crosses over all sufferings
and calamities”] may be subdivided in two [ways]: first, by indicating
the person who can contemplate; second, by illustrating the essence of
the contemplating wisdom. [The “Kuan-zizai Bodhisattva”] refers to the
first [approach], to indicate the person who can contemplate. According
to the old version of the translation [of the Praj@2p2ramit2-s^tras], the
Kuan-shi-yin is designated as the one who contemplates the sounds of
the world. By calling the name of [Kuan-shi-yin] Bodhisattva,
accompanied with verbal deeds, [sentient beings] are saved from all
disasters. This is how the name is established and called Kuan-shi-yin.
Yet the power to contemplate bodily and mental deeds is not revealed
[in the name of Kuan-shi-yin]. However, the “Kuan-zizai” mentioned in
this scripture refers to the one who internally realizes the twofold
emptiness while externally contemplating the three deeds effortlessly and
acting at his/her unrestricted discretion. Therefore [he/she] is named
“Kuan-zizai.”
Now this Bodhisattva, who is truly in the last period of practice

prior to guaranteed enlightenment as a cause of the fruit of
buddhahood, has already become a Buddha. What could be the mistake
in constructing [such a concept of a bodhisattva]? If this is such a
bodhisattva, how is [this bodhisattva] comprehensively interpreted in the
Kuan-yin san-mei [ching]? According to the [Kuan-yin san-mei] ching,
“The Buddha says to 0nanda that now I am telling you the

real fact which is not untrue. I am aware that Kuan-shi-yin
Bodhisattva was enlightened before me and that the epithets
of the Bodhisattva were ‘Ś2st2devamanusy2n2m’, ‘Tath2gata’,
‘Arhat’, ‘Samyak-sambuddha’, ‘Vidy2caran2sampanna’, ‘Sugata’,
‘Lokavid’, ‘Anuttara’, ‘Purusadamy2s2ratha’, and ‘Bhagavan’. At
that time, I was a disciple of that Buddha [who was
Kuan-shi-yin Bodhisattva] and an ascetic practitioner.”
If this is such a buddha, how is [this buddha] comprehensively

interpreted in the Avalokite$vara-bodhisattva-mah2sthamaprapta-bodhisattva-
s^tra? This s^tra states: “Good sons, although the life of Amit2bha is
infinite millions of kalpas, there must be an ultimate end and final
enlightenment (parinirv2!a).” It continues,
“Good sons, after the period of the true dharma of Amit2bha

Buddha has vanished, when a bright star [that might be Venus]
appears after midnight, Avalokite$vara Bodhisattva, sitting
cross-legged under the bodhi-tree decorated with the seven
treasures, will attain perfect supreme enlightenment and will be
called the ‘Jewel Sign-Buddha (Ratnaketu Tath2gata)’ who fulfills
the ten epithets and whose land is called ‘the majestic paradise
ornamented with various jewels’ (Joongbo-Jangum).”
In addition, the Larger Sukh2vat6vyuha-s^tra states that the

“Kuan-[shi]-yin Bodhisattva completes a bodhisattva practice in this land
and, at the end of [his/her] life, will be incarnated in the buddhaland.”
[On the one hand], it can be interpreted that since those [s^tras, i.e.,
the Kuan-yin san-mei ching, the Avalokite$vara-bodhisattva-mah2sthamaprapta-
bodhisattva-s^tra, and the Larger Sukh2vat6vyuha-s^tra,] use the same name
of Kuan-[shi]-yin for different persons, their teachings do not contradict

each other, just as all buddhas are called “Sun-and-Moon-Glow
(Candrasuryapradipa)” in the Lotus S^tra. [On the other hand], it also can
be interpreted that there are two kinds of [bodies] in the
Kuan-[shi]-yin: first, the true [body] and, second, the manifested [body].
The Kuan-yin san-mei ching [describes the Kuan-shi-yin] as the true body
and the Larger Sukh2vat6vyuha-s^tra [describes the Kuan-shi-yin] as the
manifested body. [Yet,] the Saddharma-pu!dar6ka-s^tra-upade$a states,
“Even though Ś2kyamuni Buddha was already enlightened a long time
ago, he attained the characteristic of the manifested [body] and
therefore, he is now becoming a Buddha.” Although there are two
different interpretations, the latter (i.e., the Saddharma-pu!dar6ka-s^tra-
upade$a) is superior and does not contradict the principle of all the
other holy teachings.
[b) Illustrating the contemplating wisdom]

[(1) The essence of the contemplating wisdom]
行深般若波羅蜜多時者
As for “when performing profoundly the Perfection of Wisdom”
The second [approach,] which illustrates the contemplating

wisdom, is twofold: first, it clarifies the essence of the [contemplating]
wisdom, and then it illustrates the function of the [contemplating]
wisdom. This is [the former,] clarifying the essence of [the
contemplating] wisdom.
“To perform”, which means to proceed, refers to the contemplating
wisdom [of the Bodhisattva]. “Profound”, which means fathomlessly deep,
has two kinds of [meanings]. One is the “profundity of performing.”
[This means that] non-discriminative wisdom internally realizes the
twofold emptiness, transcends all dualistic discriminations, and performs
the absence of both subject and object. This is the characteristic of
“performing”, and is therefore called “to perform profoundly” In this
regard, the Mah2-praj@2p2ramit2-s^tra states that “[A bodhisattva] does not
perceive performing, nor perceive non-performing, therefore it is said

that a bodhisattva profoundly performs the Perfection of Wisdom.” The
other [meaning] is the “profundity of the cognitive-object”, that is to
say, the principle of the twofold emptiness which is free from the
marks of existence and nonexistence and cuts off all conceptual
elaborations. [Thus,] non-discriminative wisdom realizes this profound
cognitive-object; it is therefore said “to perform profoundly.”
Praj@2 in Sanskrit is translated into “wisdom” [in Chinese]. P2ra
means “the other shore” and mit2 means “to arrive.” According to the
order [of the Sanskrit language], it is written as “praj@2 p2ra mit2 (智彼
岸到)”; [yet,] according to [the syntax of the Chinese] language, [it is
expressed] as “praj@2 mit2 p2ra (智到彼岸)” which means “to arrive at
the other shore by means of wisdom”, because wisdom causes
obstructions to be cut off and [leads sentient beings] to arrive at
nirv2!a.
“When” denotes a temporal point. The Mah2-praj@2p2ramit2-s^tra
explains that “based on conditioned dharmas, temporal points are
described provisionally, yet the calculation of time is not comprised in
the realm of [the five] aggregates (skandhas), [twelve] sense bases
(2yatanas), [and eighteen realms (dh2tu)].” The Śrama!a-$2stra also
interprets [time] in the same way as [the Mah2-praj@2p2ramit2-s^tra] and
states that “caused by [conditioned] dharma, time is constructed
provisionally and does not exist separately apart from [conditioned]
dharma.” The Yog2c2rabh^mi-$2stra illustrates that “from the perspective
of conditioned dharma, the division of before and after provisionally
establishes the temporal points comprised in the mental formation of
dharmas not associated with mind (citta-viprayukta-samsk2ra-dharmas).” The
Buddhabh^mi-$2stra also states the same [as the Yog2c2rabh^mi-$2stra], in
that “the division of periods which is the dharmas not associated with
mind or imagination are constructed.”
The meaning of “wisdom (praj@2)” is interpreted comprehensively
in three ways, namely, [wisdom based on] word, [wisdom through]
contemplation, and [the wisdom of] the characteristic of reality. In
order to reveal [wisdom through] contemplation and to distinguish [the
wisdom of] the characteristic of reality, etc., [the s^tra] states that
“when [the Bodhisattva] performs profoundly the Perfection of Wisdom”
(In this context, the three kinds of praj@2 should be explained).
[(2) The function of the contemplating wisdom]

[i) the fulfillment for one's own benefit as personal aim]
照見五蘊皆空者
As for “[Kuan-zizai Boddhisattva] illuminatingly sees that the five
aggregates are all empty”
This illustrates the function of wisdom, which is twofold: first, for

[the fulfillment of] one's own benefit [as personal aim], and second, for
[the fulfillment of] others' benefit [as altruistic aim]. This [statement]
clarifies the contemplation of emptiness, which is for [the fulfillment of]
one's own benefit. In order to interpret this statement, the various
[meanings of] contemplation will be explained first; only then, based on
the previously [explained meanings of] contemplation, will the statement
from the s^tra be interpreted.
As for the various meanings of “contemplation”, so to speak, the
Buddha's teachings are so profound that they are originally of “one
taste”; [however,] scholars who are not awakened yet advocate various
opinions. In this regard, the World Honored One says, according to the
Buddhabh^mi-s^tra, that
“The Buddha expounds to Myosaeng that, metaphorically,

before entering the great ocean, all kinds of large and small
rivers are different from each other in shape and quantity;
[however,] once they enter the ocean, there is no difference in
their shapes and quantities. Likewise, bodhisattvas who have not
yet entered the great ocean of the Tath2gata's pure realm of
ultimate reality differ from each other in terms of the quality
and the degree of their wisdom. Yet, when [bodhisattvas] enter
into the great ocean of the Tath2gata's pure realm of ultimate
reality, they are not different from each other in terms of the
quality and degree of their wisdom, and perfect a wisdom of
harmony based on ‘one taste.’”
Bandhuprabha interprets that “One thousand years ago, the

Buddha-Dharmas were of ‘one taste’; [however], a thousand years later,
there was a conflict between [the notions of] emptiness and existence.”
One thousand years after the Buddha passed away, two bodhisattvas
appeared at the same period in K2@c6pura, in southern India; one was
Bh2vaviveka and the other was Dharmap2la. In order to lead sentient
beings to realize the Buddha-Dharma, they established the Emptiness
School and the Existence School, and together accomplished the
Buddha's intention. Bh2vaviveka emphasized emptiness by negating [the
notion of] existence in order to let [sentient beings] eliminate the
attachment to existence, while Dharmap2la established [the doctrine of]
existence by negating [the notion of emptiness] in order to let [sentient
beings] eliminate the attachment to emptiness. If so, emptiness does not
contradict the principle that existence is emptiness, and no nonexistence
[in other words, existence], does not contradict the teaching that
emptiness is form. Both emptiness and existence confirm the twofold
truth, and neither emptiness nor existence also confirms the Middle
Path. What a great doctrine of Buddha-Dharma, isn't it?
Question: Is the conflict between existence and nonexistence in
accordance with the Buddha's intention?
Answer: To be victorious [over the other's view] in debate by
attaching to one's own view is to contradict the holy teachings [of the
Buddha]. [Yet] the Buddha himself allowed the enlightened Bodhisattvas
[to use the concept of existence and nonexistence]. Moreover, since the
two Bodhisattvas [i.e., Bh2vaviveka and Dharmap2la] complement each
other in helping sentient beings understand [the Buddha's teaching],
how could they be against the Buddha's intention?
For this reason, here, two kinds of teachings of contemplation will
be briefly enumerated. First, Bh2vaviveka established a teaching of
contemplation based on the Praj@2p2ramit2-s^tras as well as the doctrine
of N2g2rjuna. In other words, this teaching is about contemplating
emptiness by dispelling the characteristics (lak4a!a) of all dharmas; it
claims that all dharmas are totally empty, in that there is no arising and
no ceasing [but] originally stillness, [so that] self-nature is nirv2!a. In

this context, the Praj@2p2ramit2-s^tra says that “all conditioned dharmas
are like a dream, illusion, bubble, shadow, dew, and a flash of
lightning; they should be contemplated as such.” The
Vi$esacinta-brahma-pariprccha-s^tra also states that “when mind
discriminates all dharmas, they are all incorrectly [viewed,] and when
mind does not discriminate all dharmas, they are all correctly [viewed].”
Also, the Chung-lun (M2dhyamika-k2rik2) states that “if there were
something non-empty, there should then be something empty. However,
since [something] cannot obtain non-emptiness, how is it possible to
obtain emptiness?” The Chung-lun adds that “All buddhas sometimes
teach about ‘self’ and sometimes about ‘no-self’. According to the true
nature of all dharmas, there is neither self nor no-self.” Thus, there is
much good scriptural evidence, as [mentioned] above. In this regard,
Bh2vaviveka explains in the Karatal2ratna that “both true nature and
conditioned dharmas are as empty as an illusion, and dependently arisen
(prat6tyasamutp2da), so unconditioned dharma does not exist and has
never had an actual arising, like a sky-flower.”
Second, Dharmap2la established a teaching of contemplation based
on the Sa8dhinirmocana-s^tra, etc., as well as the doctrine of
Maitreyanatha. This illustrates the teaching of the contemplation of
emptiness by affirming consciousness-only and denying the cognitive
object. It claims that all dharmas penetrate both existence and
nonexistence; the imagined nature (parikalpa), which consists of delusion,
is not the principle [of ultimate reality]; the dependent nature
(paratantra) arises by causes and conditions and therefore exists; the
perfected nature (parini4panna), which has the principle [of ultimate
reality], is not nonexistent. In this context, the Sa8dhinirmocana-s^tra
states that, because of the imagined nature, it is said that all dharmas
do not have self-nature. According to the Mah2ratnak^%a-s^tra, “If
someone denies that all dharmas do not have self-nature, I would say
that the person is not able to be guided.” The Yog2c2rabh^mi-$2stra
states that “because of the imagined nature, s^tras which conform with
the teaching of [the Sa8dhinirmocana-s^tra] illustrate that all dharmas do
not have self-nature.”

According to the verses of the Madhy2ntavibh2g2bh2sya, “There
exists the discrimination of the unreal; in [the discrimination of the
unreal], there is no duality at all, but only emptiness; [yet] in this
[emptiness], there also exists [the discrimination of the unreal].
Therefore, it is said that because all dharmas are neither empty nor
non-empty and are both nonexistent and existent, this confirms the
Middle Way.” There is much good scriptural evidence, as [cited] above.
In this context, the Treatise in Twenty Verses on Consciousness-Only
(Vij@2ptim2trat2-Vim$atik2-k2rik2) states that “Realizing that all dharmas do
not exist is not considered the attainment of the no-self of dharmas.
Rather, complete realization of the no-self of all dharmas, in which
ignorant sentient beings discriminate self-nature (svabh2va) with the
imagined nature, is considered attainment of the no-self of dharmas.”
The explanation concerning “contemplation” is as stated above.

Now [the main part of] the text shall be interpreted.
The five aggregates (skandhas) refer to the five [kinds of]
aggregates of form, sensation, perception, mental formation, and
consciousness. The forms of the [six] sense organs, [their six] objects
(vi4aya), and the [twelve] sense bases (2yatanas) can apprehend locations
and have a characteristic of materiality; therefore they are called “form
(r^pa).” The feelings of suffering and pleasure and of neither suffering
nor pleasure connect with, respectively, unfavorable, favorable, and
neutral realms; therefore, they are called “sensation (vedan2).” All
consciousnesses, along with perception, recognize the distinction of
objects, such as male, female, etc., and produce all ideas; therefore,
they are called “perception (sa@@2).” The mind exercises mental
functions, such as thought, etc., to create good deeds, etc.; this is called
“mental formation (samsk2ra).” All consciousnesses, such as visual
consciousness, etc., discern their objects; therefore, they are called
“consciousness (vij@2na).”
All five kinds [of aggregates] have the meaning of an
accumulation; therefore, they are called “aggregates (skandha).” These
five aggregates consist of three kinds [of natures]: first, the imagined
nature of the five aggregates, which is not a [true] principle but a
delusion; second, the dependent nature of the five aggregates, which
exists provisionally by causes and conditions; third, the perfected nature
of the five aggregates, which is the principle of true reality. According
to the Madhy2nt2vibhaga, there are three kinds of aggregates, which are
the imagined, the characteristic, and the dharma-nature; this
[interpretation] is adopted from the new version of the translation. The
Treatise on the Eighteen Emptinesses (A4%2da$2$unyat2-$2stra) also explains
[this] in the same way as [the Madhy2nt2vibhaga], and therefore
classifies [the aggregates] as of three kinds: the first is discrimination;
the second is characteristic; and the third is suchness. Within these
three kinds of five aggregates, each consists of the twofold emptiness,
that is, the emptiness of sentient beings and of dharma. The emptiness
of both kinds intends to reveal the principle to be realized, that is, the
twofold emptiness of the above. There are two different interpretations
of this [twofold] emptiness.
According to the doctrine of Bh2vaviveka, there are two
interpretations. One claims that among the three [natures], the first two
[namely, the imagined nature and the dependent nature] are to be
negated, [but] not the perfected nature. In this regard, the Chung-lun
(M2dhyamaka-$2stra) states that “Dharmas arisen by cause and condition
are referred to as emptiness.” The other claims that the three natures
of the five aggregates are all empty. In this regard, the Karatal2ratna
states that “Unconditioned dharmas do not exist and have never had an
actual arising, like a sky-flower.” Accordingly, it should be understood
that the perfected nature is also negated
According to the doctrine of Dharmap2la, among the three kinds
of aggregates, only the imagined nature is negated in order to illustrate
the nature of emptiness. Scriptural evidences are as described above
[i.e. Chung-lun and Karatal2ratna]. A version [of the Heart S^tra] states
that “[The Bodhhisattva] illuminatingly sees that the five aggregates, etc.,
are all empty.” Although there are two different versions, the latter
[that is, the new version] is the correct one because the word “etc.” is
found in the original Sanskrit scripture. [The meaning of] “etc.”

described in the latter [version] should be understood based on [the
doctrine of Dharmap2la].
[ii) the fulfillment for others' benefit (parārtha) as

altruistic aim]
度一切苦厄者
As for “crossing over all sufferings and calamities,”
This statement illustrates the second function of wisdom, which is

“[the fulfillment for] others' benefit [as altruistic aim].” There are three
different [interpretations] for this part. One interprets that suffering is
calamity; therefore, it is called “calamitous suffering (苦厄).” This
corresponds to the appositional determinative compound (karmadh2raya)
of the six-compound (Sat-samasa). There is no defiled dharma which is
not suffering; therefore, the World Honored One expounds that the
three realms [of sa8s2ra] are all suffering. In this context, the teaching
of suffering can be summed up in three kinds of suffering. Those are:
“suffering produced by direct causes (duhkha-duhkha);” “suffering by loss
or deprivation (viparinama-duhkha);” and “suffering by the passing or
impermanence of all things (samsk2ra-duhkha).” Within these [sufferings],
there are eight kinds [of suffering], namely, [the suffering of] birth,
aging, sickness, death, being conjoined with what one dislikes, being
disjoined from what one likes, not getting what one wants, and all
grasping at [any of] the five skandhas. For more details of the
duhkha-duhkha, each of the twenty-five kinds of existences consists of the
four [kinds of] conditioned characteristics (lak4a!as), which are arising,
abiding, changing and ceasing; thus, it becomes one hundred kinds of
suffering. The twenty-five kinds of existences refer to the four levels of
holy persons, the four evil destinies, the four states of the formless
realm, the four states of meditations, brahm2, the six heavens of the
desire realm, No-Thought Heaven, and An2g2min. Another interprets
that “the suffering of calamity” refers to the four kinds of calamities,
i.e., greed, existence, point of view, and ignorance. These four kinds [of
calamities] fetter all sentient beings and cause them to undergo various
kinds of suffering, similar to putting a yoke on a carriage. When based
on this interpretation, it is the suffering of the [four] calamities,
therefore called “the suffering of calamity,” which corresponds to the
dependent determinative compound (tatpuru4a) of the six-compound
(sat-samasa). [Lastly,] the other interprets that each “suffering” and
“calamity” is separately categorized, as the two interpretations of the
above; therefore, it corresponds to the copulative compound (dvandva) of
the six-compound (sat-samasa).
[2. Illustrating the cognitive-object contemplated]

[a) Illustrating the nature of emptiness]
[(1) Indicating the person who is guided]
舍利子者
As for “Śāriputra”,
The second [part of the s^tra], from [“Ś2riputra” … to “there is

no wisdom, no attainment,”] illustrates the realm of the cognitive-object
contemplated. There are two approaches in this part: [a)] first, to
illustrate the nature of emptiness by means of the four statements,
[namely, “Form is not different from emptiness, emptiness is not
different from form. Form is emptiness; emptiness is form.”]; [b)]
second, to reveal the characteristics of emptiness based on the six
meanings [namely, “non-originated, non-annihilated, non-defiled,
non-purified, non-increasing, and non-decreasing”]. The first [approach,
that is, to illustrate the nature of emptiness by means of the four
statements] is twofold: (1) indicating the person who is guided, and (2)
illustrating the nature of emptiness. [The “Ś2riputra”] indicates the
person [who is guided].
The Sanskrit term “Ś2riputra” is rendered “she-li-fu-tuo-luo” [(奢
利富多羅 or 舍利弗多羅) in Chinese characters]. “Ś2ri” is translated into
“Ch'ü-yü bird” and “putra” refers to “son” [in Chinese]. A mother's eyes
are blue and clear, just like the eyes of the Ch'ü-yü bird. For this
reason, [the son] is named after his mother and called “Ch'ü-yü.” The
Ta Ming-tu ching (A%as2hasrik2-Praj@2p2ramit2-s^tra) states that [$2riputra]
is called “chiu-lu-tzu (鷲鷺子)” or “upade$a (優婆提舍),” who is named
after his father. The translation of [“$2riputra”] into “shen-tzu (身子)” in
the old version is an incorrect one.
Question: [Since] this [teaching of] praj@2p2ramit2 is the dharma for
the bodhisattva, why does the World Honored One preach not to the
bodhisattva but to Ś2riputra?
Answer: According to the Mah2praj@2p2ramit2-$2stra, “The person
[named] Ś2riputra attained ten thousand kinds of sam2dhi and surpassed
the Buddha's other disciples in wisdom. In this sense, the World
Honored One said that the entire wisdom of all sentient beings,
excluding the World Honored One, is less than one-sixteenth of the
wisdom and knowledge of Ś2riputra. In addition, Ś2riputra, at the mere
age of eight, was excellent in reasoning and discourse containing his
theories. In this regard, all contemporary scholars admired his
unprecedented excellence and all people respected him regardless of
their intelligence or age.” The other stories about this are described in
detail in the Mah2praj@2p2ramit2-$2stra. Therefore, in the [Heart S^tra],
the Buddha preached to Ś2riputra and intended to lead the H6nay2na to
the Mah2y2na as well.
[(2) Illustrating the nature of emptiness]

[(2a) explaining the four statements by means of the
aggregate of form]
色不異空空不異色色卽是空空卽是色者

As for ”Form is not different from emptiness, emptiness is not
different from form; form is emptiness, emptiness is form,”
This is to illustrate the nature of emptiness by means of the four

statements. There are two approaches: first, to explain the four
statements by means of the aggregate of form; then, to [interpret] that
[the other] four aggregates [i.e., sensation, perception, mental formation,

and consciousness] all contain the four statements. This section is [the
former], “to explain the four statements by means of the aggregate of
form.” In interpreting the four statements, first of all, the nature of
emptiness shall be explained. As differentiated earlier, emptiness is
twofold: one is the emptiness of the sentient being, the other is the
emptiness of dharma.
The emptiness of the sentient being which has been expounded
consists of four kinds. (i) That there is no self to be attached to is
called “emptiness;” accordingly, [emptiness] is not included in the
numerical category of all dharmas. Therefore, in the chapter on the
bodhisattva stages in the Yog2c2rabh^mi-$2stra, it is stated that “both
conditioned and unconditioned are called existence, and neither a self
nor that which belongs to a self is called nonexistence.” (ii) The
suchness (tathat2) which is revealed by the emptiness of a sentient
being has been expounded by emptiness and, therefore, is also called
“emptiness.” (iii) [The emptiness of a sentient being refers to] the
specific delusion about emptiness which is associated with the truth of
suffering and, accordingly, takes the defiled five aggregates as its
essence. In this context, chapter 6 of the Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun states that
“specific [delusion] about emptiness is no-self because it is associated
with the truth of suffering.” (iv) The general emptiness which is
associated with all dharmas is no-self; it uses all dharmas as its essence.
Thus, although various s^tras illustrate the four kinds of no-self of
all dharmas, according to the theory of the three natures it consists of
three kinds, [not four kinds]: first, the emptiness of the imagined
nature (parikalpita-sv2bh2va); second, the emptiness of the dependent
nature (paratantra-sv2bh2va); and third, the emptiness of the perfected
nature (pari!ispanna-sv2bh2va). Each of these three natures becomes, in
turn, the essence [of emptiness].
As for the four kinds of emptiness of dharma, although there is no
proper scriptural evidence [for them], the four statements can be
posited by referring to the principle [of the emptiness of dharma]. The
three kinds of emptiness of dharma can be properly understood based
on the above [theory of the three natures]. For more detailed

differentiation [of emptiness], there are eighteen kinds of emptiness, as
described in the A4%2da$a$^nyat2-$2stra. In the Mah2praj@2p2ramit2-s^tra, it
is described as sixteen, seventeen, eighteen, or twenty kinds of
emptiness. The details are explained in the [Mah2praj@2p2ramit2-s^tra].
Next, the four statements shall be interpreted, based on the three
natures. Of the four statements, the first two, [“form is not different
from emptiness, emptiness is not different from form”] indicate the
main teaching of the doctrine [of No-characteristics], and the other two,
[“form is emptiness, emptiness is form”] dispel doubts [created by the
H6nay2nist view]. “Form is not different from emptiness” implies that
worldly [truth] is not different from ultimate [truth]. “Emptiness is not
different from form” implies that ultimate [truth] is not different from
worldly [truth]. The latter [part of the two statements, “form is
emptiness, emptiness is form,”] dispels doubts created by the
[H6nay2nist] view. One might question whether [form and emptiness]
are not different from each other, either because they depend on each
other or because they are identical. In this regard, the teaching that
“form is emptiness, emptiness is form” is expounded. [“Form is not
different from emptiness”] is neither because they depend on each
other, nor because they are identical.
With regard to these statements, there are two different
interpretations among Indian scholars. First, according to Bh2vaviveka,
form has three kinds of natures, namely the imagined nature, [the
dependent nature, and the perfected nature]. Emptiness is able to dispel
[its] nature, [so] the essence (t'i) [of emptiness] is not the three
natures. Thus, to say that “form is emptiness” means that since the
imagined nature is inherently nonexistence, it is referred to as
emptiness; definitively, this emptiness does not mean that there is
emptiness either. In this context, the Chung-lun (M2dhyamika-k2rik2)
states that “If there is a dharma that is not emptiness, there must be a
dharma that is emptiness. In reality, there is no dharma that is not
emptiness, so how could there be a dharma that is emptiness?” With
regard to the emptiness of the other two natures [i.e., dependent nature
and perfected nature], it should be understood in accord with [the

Chung-lun]. In order to eliminate the attachment to existence, [the
Chung-lun] illustrates emptiness as such: the dependent nature, which is
like an illusion and so forth, pursues conditions and therefore is empty;
the perfected nature has never arisen, just like a sky-flower, and
therefore is also empty in itself.
Another view [of the doctrine of Bh2vaviveka] additionally
interprets that the first two natures [i.e. the imagined nature and the
dependent nature] are to be negated, but not the perfected nature. Both
[interpretations of] the doctrine [of Bh2vaviveka] agree to allow one to
dispel the characteristics of existence and nonexistence and to cut off
conceptual elaboration. Therefore, one may question whether form is
identical with or different from emptiness. [If one considers that they,
i.e., form and emptiness,] are identical to each other as one essence
(t'i), one can become easily attached to oneness, and if [one considers
that] their essences are different from each other, one can attach to
their being different. Both oneness and difference [at the same time]
would be contradictory to each other, wouldn't they? [Also], neither
oneness nor difference would make a conceptual elaboration.
The differentiation of these four statements is interpreted in two
different ways. One is from [the view of] both heretics and H6nay2nists:
most of them, based on the superficial aspect, illustrate the four
statements because the words “existence” and “nonexistence,” etc., depict
that which is expounded. The other is from [the view of] Mah2y2nists:
[in this view,] the words “existence” and “nonexistence,” etc., are
expounded via negativa because all dharmas are not expressible [in
words]. Yet, all dharmas consist of two kinds of characteristics (lak4a!a),
namely, “an own characteristic” and “a common characteristic.” An own
characteristic is that which is obtainable merely through knowledge of
direct perception (prayak4a), not by provisional knowledge or words.
Therefore, when it is obtained from that which is expounded by
provisional knowledge or words, it is referred to as “a common
characteristic,” as when one describes the color blue. The differences
between the characteristics, such as those between stems and leaves,
etc., are recognizable only through direct perception; through provisional

knowledge of names and words one can only expound common
characteristics such as the appearance of the color blue. When
describing [a shade of] blue, the description of “blue” is expressed by
negating yellow, etc., which is not the correct [description of] the color
blue; therefore, it is said to be expounded via negativa.
There are two different views on pursuing that which is
expounded via negativa. First, according to the Bh2vaviveka school, the
principle of the nature [of that which is expounded via negativa] can
neither be designated by means of name nor be featured by means of
characteristics; it is both taken apart yet non-attached, and put together
yet not established. The scriptural evidence for this teaching of
[Mah2y2na] should be referered to the above [view]. Second, according
to the Dharmap2la school, in reality there are both worldly and
ultimate principles, which are separate from names and words; but
since ultimate nature is designated as opposed to worldly [nature,] it
does not deny that which is expounded. A scholar of the Bh2vaviveka
school also conforms to this view [of the Dharmap2la school]. In this
context, Dharmap2la criticizes Bh2vaviveka in that if, based on ultimate
nature, it is said that all dharmas are empty, [the effect is] to make a
logical error of the “Ultimate mutual agreement.” Here, the difference
[between the two schools] results from the fact that the doctrine of
Bh2vaviveka denies the dependent nature, whereas [the doctrine of]
Dharmap2la does not allow [to deny it]. As a consequence of this
reasoning, in the doctrine of [the Bh2vaviveka school], it is claimed that
words such as existence and nonexistence, etc. represent that which is
expounded via negativa apart from the pitfalls of conceptual elaboration
such as either oneness or difference. This is the end of the
interpretation of the [four] statements based on the Bh2vaviveka school.
Second, to interpret the four statements according to the
Dharmap2la [school], there are three kinds of form, that is, three
natures of form; there are also three kinds of emptiness, [in other
words,] the essence (t'i) [of emptiness] has three natures. In this
regard, the Bodhisattva Asa!ga, in the Madhy2ntavibh2g2-$2stra, illustrates
the three kinds [of emptiness]: first, the emptiness of the absence of
self-nature, because self-nature does not exist; second, the emptiness of
other-nature, because it is different from its falsely grasped
self-nature; and third, the emptiness of self-nature, because self-nature is
revealed by the twofold emptiness [that is, the emptiness of both
sentient beings and dharma].
(i) Based on the imagined nature of form as opposed to [the
imagined nature of] emptiness, the four statements are [interpreted] in
three ways:
(i-1) [Based on] the imagined nature of form as opposed to that
of emptiness, the four statements may be explained. Forms such as
sense organs or sense objects, etc., grasped by feelings, do not differ
from the emptiness of the imagined, which is intrinsically nonexistent;
therefore, it is said that “form is emptiness.” Emptiness which is
intrinsically nonexistent exists based on feelings; therefore, it is said
that “emptiness is form.” This is mutual immediacy of the same nature.
It should be understood as above for the [other] two statements [i.e.,
“form is not different from emptiness, emptiness is not different from
form,”] indicating the doctrine [of No-characteristics].
(i-2) The four statements may be explained [based on] the
imagined nature of form as opposed to the dependent nature of
emptiness. The real form which is imagined by relying on the
dependent nature does not differ from the emptiness of the dependent
nature which has no reality; therefore it is said that “form is
emptiness.” Moreover, the false feeling that is grasped at the locus of
this emptiness affirms that there is real form; therefore, it is said that
“emptiness is form.” The [other] two statements indicating the doctrine
[of No-characteristics] can also be understood this way. This is the
mutual immediacy of different natures.
(i-3) The four statements may be explained [based on] the
imagined nature of form as opposed to the perfected nature [of
emptiness]. Real form which is grasped by the perfected nature does
not differ from the emptiness of the self-nature of the perfected nature.
Since real form grasps at the emptiness of self-nature, it is said that
“form is emptiness and emptiness is form.” The [other] two statements

indicating the doctrine [of No-characteristics] can also be understood
this way. This is the mutual immediacy of different essences (t'i), just
as with the dependent nature.
(ii) The four statements may be [explained based on] the
dependent nature of form as opposed to the emptiness of the
other-nature. That is, form originated by condition does not differ from
the dependent nature which is the emptiness of the other-nature. Since
this nature of emptiness is matter, it is said that “form is emptiness
and emptiness is form.” This is the mutual immediacy of the same
nature. The [other] two statements indicating the doctrine [of
No-characteristics] can be understood as above.
(iii) In addition, the four statements may be [interpreted] in two
ways, [based on] the form which is originated by conditions as the
dependent nature, as opposed to the emptiness of the two natures [i.e.,
imagined nature and perfected nature]. [First, the interpretation of the
four statements] does not differ from the previous one [when based on
the form which is originated by conditions as the dependent nature], as
opposed to the emptiness of other-nature. [Second,] the four statements
may also be [explained based on the form which is originated by
conditions as the dependent nature], as opposed to the emptiness of
self-nature; that is, the form which is originated by conditions takes
suchness as its essence, and this nature of emptiness is not different
from the dependent nature. In this regard, the Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun states
that “Therefore, this [perfected nature] and the dependent nature are
neither different nor not-different, like the nature of impermanence,
etc.” The Madhy2ntavibh2g2-$2stra also states that “There is only
emptiness and even in this there is that.” As a consequence of this
reasoning, both the dependent nature and the perfected nature are
inseparable from each other; therefore, it is stated that “form is
emptiness and emptiness is form.” This does not mean that because
what is originated by conditions is empty, and thus mutually or
immediately interrelated. Unless this is understood as such, it would
result in a mistake that contradicts the doctrine [of No-characteristics].
Accordingly, this is the mutual immediacy of different natures. The

[other] two statements about the doctrine [of No-characteristics] can
also be understood in this way.
(iv) The four statements may be [explained based on] the
perfected nature as opposed to the emptiness of self-nature. That is,
because the perfected nature is the true nature of form arising from
dependent nature, it is called “form,” and because it is that which is
revealed by the twofold emptiness of both person and dharma, it is
called the emptiness of the perfected nature. For this reason, it is said
that “form is emptiness and emptiness is form.” This is the mutual
immediacy of the same nature. The [other] two statements about the
doctrine [of No-characteristics] can also be understood in this way.
[(2b) interpreting that the other four aggregates all

contain the four statements]
受想行識亦復如是者
As for “The same is true with sensation, perception, mental
formation, and consciousness”
This [statement] is the second to suggest that [the other] four

aggregates [i.e., sensation, perception, mental formation, and
consciousness] all contain the four statements. With regard to the
mutual immediacy of the four statements, it should be understood as
above. For added understanding [of this statement], there are two
different versions of the [Heart] S^tra: one version [suggests] the same
as above, and the other version [states] that the s^tra says that “The
same is true with sensation, perception, mental formation, and
consciousness, etc.” The “etc.” implies that the six kinds of skillful
means, namely, [the five] skandhas, [the six] sense bases, the [eighteen]
realms of existence, the [twelve limbs of] dependent origination, the
Four [Noble] Truths, and bodhi-nirv2!a are followed by the words [i.e.,
sensation, perception, mental formation, and consciousness] of the s^tra.
Then, to grasp “the four aggregates, etc.,” is [to realize] that the rest of
the five teachings [i.e., six sense bases, the eighteen realms of existence,
the twelve limbs of dependent origination, the Four Noble Truths, and
bodhi-nirv2!a] all contain the four statements; therefore, the word “etc.”
is used. Each meaning of the six teachings will be clarified later.
[b) Illustrating the characteristics of emptiness]

[(1) Revealing the characteristics of emptiness by means of
the six meanings]
舍利子是諸法空相不生不滅不垢不淨不增不減者

As for “Śāriputra, the characteristics of emptiness in all dharmas
are neither originated nor annihilated, neither defiled nor purified, and
neither increasing nor decreasing,”
In this [section], which is the second [approach, illustrating the

cognitive-object contemplated,] the characteristics of emptiness are
revealed by means of the six kinds of meanings, [i.e., neither originated
nor annihilated, neither defiled nor purified, and neither increasing nor
decreasing]. [To illustrate the characteristics of emptiness] is twofold:
(1) to correctly reveal the characteristics of emptiness by means of the
six meanings; (2) to dispel [attachment] to the six teachings of dharma
[namely, six skillful means, i.e., five skandhas, six sense bases, the
eighteen realms of existence, the twelve limbs of dependent origination,
the Four Noble Truths, and bodhi-nirv2!a] based on the characteristics of
emptiness. In [the statement] revealing the six characteristics [of
emptiness], “to Ś2riputra” would be interpreted the same as above. The
six characteristics [of emptiness] refer to “neither originated nor
annihilated, neither defiled nor purified, and neither increasing nor
decreasing.” Yet these six characteristics have been interpreted in two
different ways in India: one was by Bh2vaviveka and the other by
Dharmap2la.
According to the doctrine of Bh2vaviveka, the six characteristics
[of emptiness] are interpreted as those that are originally nonexistent
[but] now exist, called the “originated,” and those that temporarily
existed, [then] returned to nonexistence, called the “annihilated” (as

described in Yog2c2rabh^mi-$2stra); the nature which is contaminated and
impure is named the “defiled,” and that which is apart from the
contaminated and defiled is called the “purified” (as described in
various scriptures); to regard dharmas as possessing functions is called
“increasing,” and to falsely imagine that dharmas can be destroyed is
called “decreasing” (as described in Mah2y2nasamgraha).
[These] three opposing pairs of the six characteristics are
interpreted from three different viewpoints. One claims that this
statement illustrates the three [pairs] by means of stages. In other
words, because the true nature of emptiness is separate from all
characteristics, prior to the path [to enlightenment], [the characteristic
of emptiness] completely departs from the transmigration of origination
and annihilation [in sa8s2ra]. On the path [to enlightenment], [in the
characteristic of emptiness,] there is neither defiled nor purified in both
delusion and wisdom; and after the path [to enlightenment], [for the
characteristic of emptiness,] the increase or decrease of both essence
and function is permanently discarded. The other claims that this
statement illustrates the three pairs by means of natures: the imagined
nature (parikalpitasv2bh2va) is originally nonexistent, so it is neither
originated nor annihilated; the dependent nature (paratantrasv2bh2va) is
originated by following conditions, so it is neither defiled nor purified;
the perfected nature (parini4pannasv2bh2va) has never arisen, so it is
neither increasing nor decreasing. Another claims that this [statement]
explains that each of the three opposing pairs of the six characteristics
penetrates to all [three] stages and [three] natures, because all of them
dispel the three natures and remain in no [stage]. Among [these] three
[interpretations], the last one is superior because it is in accord with
the fundamental doctrine [of Bh2vaviveka]. According to the doctrine of
Dharmap2la, there are many different real principles of the
characteristic of emptiness, such as neither oneness nor difference and
neither existence nor nonexistence, etc.
This s^tra also states that the three opposing pairs of the six
[characteristics] means that both “originated” and “annihilated” are the
common characteristics (s2m2nya-lak4a!a) of conditioned dharmas; both

“defiled” and “purified” differentiate the self-nature of all dharmas; and
both “increasing” and “decreasing” are said to reveal the meanings and
functions of dharmas. The true principle of the three [pairs] of
emptiness is interconnected with the existence of the six characteristics,
and so what [this] s^tra intends to correctly reveal is the emptiness of
self-nature. [This is] because the truth revealed by the twofold
emptiness of both sentient being and dharma is interconnected with both
delusion and awakening as that on which they depend.
[(2) Dispelling the attachment to the six teachings of dharma

based on the characteristics of emptiness]
[(2a) dispelling the attachment to the teaching on the
five aggregates]
是故空中無色無受想行識者
As for “Therefore, in emptiness there is no form, sensation,
perception, mental formation, nor consciousness,”
In this [statement], which is the second [approach, illustrating the

characteristics of emptiness], based on the above characteristics of
emptiness, [attachment] to the six teachings of dharma is to be
dispelled. There are six categories to dispelling [attachment] to the six
teachings of dharma. This is, first, to dispel [attachment] to the teaching
on the five aggregates. In other words, the emptiness of all dharmas
contains six characteristics; therefore in emptiness, there is no dharma of
the five aggregates. Each meaning of the five aggregates is the same as
the one previously interpreted. The six teachings of dharma described
here refer to that which reveals comprehensively both common and
specific cognitive-objects of the two vehicles. Since the first three
[teachings of dharma, i.e., the five aggregates, twelve sense fields, and
eighteen realms of existence,] remain to reveal the nature of all
dharmas, it is therefore said that they are called the common
cognitive-objects of [all] three vehicles. Based on the nature of the
former [three teachings of] dharma, the teachings of dependent

origination, etc., [i.e., the Four Noble Truths, and bodhi-nirv2!a] are
specifically expounded according to the level of sentient beings;
therefore, the latter three [teachings of dharma] are called specific
cognitive-objects. In this regard, the Lotus S^tra describes that for
hearers ($r2vakas), the teaching of the Four Noble Truths is expounded;
for solitary realizers (pratyekabuddhas), the teaching of Dependent
Origination is expounded; and for bodhisattvas, the teaching of the Six
p2ramit2s is expounded.
[(2b) dispelling the teaching on the twelve sense bases

(āyatanas)]
無眼耳鼻舌身意無色聲香味觸法者
As for “There is no eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind; no form,
sound, smell, taste, touchables, nor object of mind,”
This [statement], which is the second [section dispelling

attachment to the six teachings of dharma], is suggested to dispel [the
teaching on] the twelve sense bases. Next, in order to briefly explain
the meaning of the twelve sense bases, three aspects may be
differentiated: (i) to clarify what gave rise to the teaching [of the twelve
sense bases]; (ii) to interpret the names [of the twelve sense bases];
(iii) to disclose the nature of the essence [of the twelve sense bases].
[(i)] With regard to what gave rise to the teaching [of the twelve
sense bases], there are two intentions: that is to say, to awaken
[sentient beings] to enter the twofold emptiness of both sentient being
and dharma. To enter the emptiness of sentient being means, according
to the Treatise in Twenty Verses on Consciousness-Only
(Vij@2ptim2trat2-Vim$atik2-k2rik2), “to stand on this teaching of the twelve
sense bases, as it is expounded. In other words, if one thoroughly
understands that the six consciousnesses are transformed from the six
pairs of dharmas [i.e., the twelve sense bases], and that there is no
perceiver or knower at all, then one will awaken to enter the [teaching
of] no-self of living beings.” To enter the emptiness of dharmas means

that which is taught by dispelling the twelve sense bases reveals the
principle of the emptiness [of dharmas]. With regard to the difference
between Bh2vaviveka and Dharmap2la in dispelling [the teaching of the
twelve sense bases], it should be speculated as per the above.
(ii) The name [of the twelve sense bases] will be interpreted
generally first and then specifically. First, in clarifying the name of the
twelve sense bases generally, the “twelve” indicates a number and the
“sense bases” has the meaning of “produce and develop.” In other
words, because both six sense organs and [six] cognitive-objects produce
and develop all minds and their attributes, they are called “sense
bases.” This is categorized in the numerical determinative compound
(dvigu) of the six-compound (sat-samsasa). Next, [in interpreting] the
names [of the twelve sense bases] specifically, the Yog2c2rabh^mi-$2stra,
Chapter 3, states as follows:
“By seeing repeatedly various forms and discarding what is

seen, it is called ‘eye;’ by figuring this out repeatedly and being
able to hear sound, it is called ‘ear;’ by figuring this out and
being able to smell various scents, it is called ‘nose;’ by
eliminating hunger, making speeches, making a calling, it is
called ‘tongue;’ by having all sense organs respond and fill up,
it is called ‘body.’ A foolish one, in the long darkness, struts,
hides and protects him/herself, attaches to his/her own self and
considers it as ‘mine’ and ‘myself;’ moreover, entire worlds are
provisionally established by these [sense bases], all kinds of
words and thoughts, such as human being, people, living being,
living being with will, and learned-youth, etc.; therefore, this is
called ‘thinking-mind (manas-vij@2na).’”
…
“That which is materially countable, locatable, and increasable
is called ‘form;’ that which accepts and rejects and adds
different ideas is called ‘sound;’ that which is formless, without
shape, and constantly moved by the wind is called ‘smell;’ that
which can be tasted by tongue and frequently causes the
suffering of sickness is called ‘taste;’ that which is able to be
realized through body is called ‘touch;’ that which can be
sustained ubiquitously and remembered solely by the
thinking-mind is called ‘dharma.’”
(iii) In disclosing the essence [of the twelve sense bases], the
visual organ is, as described in various scriptures [i.e.,
Yog2c2rabh^mi-$2stra and Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun], that which consists of the
four gross elements on which the visual-consciousness is based. It takes
pure form as its essence. Just like the description of the visual organ,
the auditory organ consists of the four gross elements on which the
auditory-consciousness is based and takes pure form as its essence. The
mind-organ commonly uses the eighth [2laya] consciousness as its
essence.
According to the Treatise on the Great Vehicle Abhidharma
(Mah2y2na-Abhidharma-samuccaya), form consists of the four gross
elements and takes its self-nature by means of the twenty-five kinds of
phenomena perceived by the visual organ. These are blue, yellow, red,
and white, long and short, square and round, roughness and
delicateness, high and low, straight and crooked, light and shadow,
bright and dark, cloud and smoke, dust and fog, invisible form and
visible form, and form manifesting consistently and uniformly in space.
Sound consists of eleven kinds: favorable sound and unfavorable sound;
sounds consisting of mutually conflicting sounds; sounds caused by
receiving the [four] gross elements; sounds caused by not receiving the
four elements; sounds caused by fulfillment of the four elements;
sounds formed together by the world; sounds established by being
projected; sounds imagined by being attached; sounds inclusive of a
saint's words; and sounds exclusive of a saint's words. Smell consists of
six kinds: good smell; bad smell; neutral smell; smell arising together;
combined smell; and variable smell. Taste consists of twelve kinds:
bitter; sour; sweet; pungent; briny; insipid; favorable; unfavorable;
consisting of mutually conflicting [kinds of tastes]; arising together;
combined; and variable. Tactile qualities consist of twenty-six kinds: the
four elements of body; smoothness and roughness; lightness and
heaviness; softness; slowness; hastiness; coldness; hunger; thirst;
impureness; satiety; powerfulness; inferiority; anguish; itch; stickiness;
sickness; aging; death; tiredness; rest; and courage. In this way, the five
cognitive-objects are extensively described in the Treatise on the Great

Vehicle Abhidharma; the similarities and differences of various treatises
[on this subject] are described in the other chapter [of the Treatise on
the Great Vehicle Abhidharma].
The sense base of mind takes its self-nature by means of
eighty-two dharmas out of [a total of] one hundred dharmas. These are:
fifty-one kinds of dharmas of mental functions; one [dharma] of form,
that is, the form of the sense base of mind; twenty-four kinds of
dharmas unassociated with mind; and six kinds of unconditioned
[dharmas]. According to the Treatise on the Great Vehicle Abhidharma, etc.,
[the sense base of mind] takes its self-nature by means of eighty-eight
dharmas: in other words, [in addition to the above,] the four kinds of
the sense base of mind's forms and the two kinds of unconditioned
[dharmas], as described [in the Treatise on the Great Vehicle Abhidharma].
The other aspects [of the twelve sense bases] are extensively explained
in the other chapter [of the Treatise on the Great Vehicle Abhidharma].
[(2c) dispelling the teaching on the eighteen realms]
無眼界乃至無意識界者
As for “There is no eye-realm and, in this way, up to no realm of
mind-consciousness,”
This [statement], which is the third [section on dispelling

attachment to the six teachings of dharma], dispels [attachment to the
teaching on] the eighteen realms. [To interpret] the eighteen realms,
three aspects may be differentiated: (i) revealing what gave rise to the
teaching [on the eighteen realms]; (ii) interpreting the name [of the
eighteen realms]; (iii) disclosing the nature of the essence [of the
eighteen realms].
(i) What gave rise to the teaching refers to the fact that the
World Honored One teaches about the eighteen realms both to those
who construct a self by attaching to forms and mind and to those who
have an inferior spiritual level.
(ii) The name [of the eighteen realms] will be interpreted

generally first and then specifically. [In interpreting] the name of the
eighteen realms generally, “eighteen” indicates number and “realm” has
the meaning of clan or species, because all dharmas consist of eighteen
clans or species. This is [categorized] in the numerical determinative
compound (dvigu) which can be understood as [explained] above. Next,
[in interpreting] the names [of the eighteen realms] specifically, [the
names of] the six sense-organs and six cognitive-objects are as
explained in the discussion of the [twelve] sense bases. To name the six
consciousnesses is twofold: one is that the “consciousness of form” and,
in this way, up to the “consciousness of dharmas,” are named by
following the [six] cognitive-objects, because to establish names by
following the [six] cognitive-objects is in accord with the meanings of
the [six] consciousnesses; the other is that the “visual consciousness”
and, in this way, up to “mental consciousness,” are named by following
the [six] sense-organs, because to establish names by following the [six]
sense-organs fulfills the five kinds of meanings such as “support,”
“expression,” and so forth. In other words, it is named
“form-consciousness” because it is the consciousness of form and, in
this way, it is named “mental consciousness” because it is the
consciousness of mind. Therefore, it is categorized in the determinative
compound (tatpuru4a) of the six-compounds. The details are described
extensively in the Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun, Chapter 5.
(iii) In clarifying [the nature of] the essence, the twelve elements
such as eye, etc., are the same as those discussed [in the passage on
the twelve] sense bases. The six consciousnesses such as visual
[consciousness], etc., take their self-natures by means of their own
names, which appear among the one hundred dharmas. The other
aspects [of the eighteen realms] are extensively described in various
treatises.
[(2d) dispelling the teaching on the twelve limbs of

dependent origination (pratītyāsamutpāda)]
無無明亦無無明盡乃至無老死亦無老死盡者

As for “There is no [origination of] ignorance, no extinction of
ignorance, and, in this way, up to no [origination of] aging and death,
and no extinction of aging and death.”
This [statement], which is the fourth [section on dispelling

attachment to the six teachings on dharma], is meant to dispel
[attachment to] the teaching on [the twelve limbs of] dependent
origination. However, there are two kinds of [ways to view] dependent
origination: one is forward evolution (prav#tti), and the other is reverse
extermination (pratiloma). All actions (karmas) arise due to ignorance;
furthermore, aging and death are conditioned by birth [or arising]. In
this way, [sentient beings] transmigrate into the five destinies and the
four kinds of birth. It is as if the beginning point of the phase of the
full moon is not knowable. In the nature of emptiness, there is no such
forward evolution; therefore, the [Heart] S^tra illustrates that “there is
no [origination of] ignorance, and in this way, up to no [origination of]
aging and death.” The power of contemplating wisdom enables one to
extinguish ignorance. Since ignorance is extinguished, all actions are
also extinct. In this way, because birth is extinguished, aging and death
are also extinct. This is to turn [the wheel] backward and return to
nirv2!a; therefore, it is called “reverse extermination.” In the nature of
emptiness, there is no such reverse extermination; therefore, the [Heart]
S^tra also illustrates that “there is no extinction of ignorance and, in
this way, up to no extinction of aging and death.”
What is the motivation to expound the teaching [on the twelve
limbs of dependent origination] in the [Heart] S^tra? While the Lotus
S^tra expounds [the teaching on] dependent origination for [those who]
wish to attain the fruit of the solitary realizer (pratyekabuddha), the
[Heart] S^tra expounds the teaching in order to reveal the emptiness of
dharma. Nevertheless, [the teaching on] dependent origination should not
be construed according to the common interpretation, and therefore, it
will now be explained differentiating three aspects: (i) interpreting the
name [of the twelve limbs of dependent origination]; (ii) disclosing the
essence [of the twelve limbs of dependent origination]; (iii) discarding

and establishing [the twelve limbs of dependent origination].
[(i)] the name [of the twelve limbs of dependent origination] will
be interpreted generally first and then specifically. In interpreting the
name generally, “12 (twelve)” indicates the whole number which is
[described] in the S^tras on Conditioned Arising. Because each of these
[twelve] elements (ańga) is generated without being excluded and
constantly arises according to their own conditions, it is called
“dependent origination.” According to the Yog2c2rabh^mi-$2stra, from the
perspective of cause, it is called “conditioned enlightenment,” and from
the perspective of result, it is called “conditioned origination.” In this
name [of the twelve limbs of dependent origination], the doctrine is
revealed by using number, and, therefore, it is categorized in the
numerical determinative compound (dvigu) of the six-compounds.
Next, in disclosing specific names [of the twelve limbs], because,
throughout the three time periods, [one] does not understand [reality]
by attaching to cognitive-objects, which is called “ignorance” (avidy2);
because the three activities, such as [the activity of being] wholesome,
etc., are transmitted and generated, they are called “action” (karma or
samsk2ra); the eight consciousnesses, such as visual consciousness, etc.,
recognize the realm of cognitive-objects, and therefore are called
“consciousness” (vij@2na); characteristics and forms present the
appearance of matter, and therefore are called “name-and-form”
(n2ma-r^pa); the six sense-organs, such as the eye, etc., generate mind,
etc., and are called the “six sense bases” (4ad-2yatana); the three tactile
sensations, such as pain, etc., contact with the surface of objects, and
therefore are called “contact” (spar$a); the three feelings, such as
suffering, etc., feel favorable or unfavorable, etc., and are called “feeling”
(vedan2); narcissistic attachments taint the view of self and are called
“craving” (t#4!2); the four kinds of clinging, such as greediness, etc.,
attach and cling to objects and are called “clinging” (up2d2na); seeds,
such as action and consciousness, etc., are able to engender birth, etc.,
and are therefore called “existence” (bh2va); the five dharmas, such as
consciousness, etc., originate from nonexistence to existence, which is
called “birth” (j2ti); these five dharmas [eventually] decay and are
destroyed, which is therefore called “aging and death” (jar2-marana).
(ii) Disclosing the essence [of the twelve elements] is threefold:
the first is to discriminate the projection into arising; the second is to
correctly disclose the self-nature; the third is to differentiate present
seeds.
[First,] discriminating the projection into arising: ignorance and
action are called that which can project (2k4epaka) because they are able
to project the seeds of five results, such as consciousness, etc., [i.e.,
name and form, six bases, contact and feeling]; the five kinds of seeds,
such as consciousness, etc., are called that which is projected (2k4epaka)
because they are projected by the former two elements, [i.e. ignorance
and action]; the three described as craving, clinging and existence are
called that-which-can-engender (j2naka) because they immediately
engender future birth and aging and death; birth and aging and death
are [called] those-that-are-engendered (j2naka) because they are
immediately engendered by craving, clinging and existence.
[Second,] correctly disclosing the self-nature: that which can
produce and directly summons the three actions, such as [the action of
being] wholesome, etc., is the element of ignorance; that which is
projected from [ignorance] is the essence of the element of action; that
which immediately produces the seed of the eighth consciousness
(2layavij@2na) is the essence of the element of consciousness; the
remaining causes [i.e., six sense bases, contact, and feeling], excluding
the last three causes, are all categorized as the essence of the element
of name-and-form, and the last three causes refer to each of the three
[kinds of] seeds [i.e. craving, clinging, and existence]. An interpretation
with regard to name-and-form is that it comprises the five kinds of
seeds [i.e. the seeds of consciousness, name-and-form, six sense bases,
contact, and feeling] for its self-nature, and according to their
predominance, the other four kinds of seeds are established. In other
words, the seed of 2laya [consciousness], which is called the element of
consciousness, establishes the rest of the three seeds [i.e., six sense
bases, contact, and feeling], and also, the six sense bases, etc., [i.e.,
contact and feeling] can nourish the six kinds of seeds, such as [the
seed of] action.
Desire is called “craving.” Conditioned by craving, the four kinds
of clinging, such as [the clinging to] desire, are also born as the
essence of the element of clinging. These four kinds of clinging,
according to the Yog2c2rabh^mi-$2stra, Chapter 10, take desire caused by,
respectively, the cognitive-object of all desires, the four views [of
reality], the mistaken understanding of the precepts, and an illusory
view of the self (satk2rya-d#4%i), as their essence. [Some] scriptures and
treatises describe them either as the same as or different from the
S^tras on Conditioned Arising, etc. The six kinds of seeds, such as action,
consciousness, [name-and-form, the six sense bases, contact, and
feeling,] evolve when they nourish themselves; that is called “existence.”
In the fruit of the dharma engendered by the five seeds, such as
consciousness, [name-and-form, the six sense bases, contact, and
feeling,] [everything] from intermediate existence (antar2-bhava) up to
basic existence, is called the element of “birth,” as long as there is no
deterioration; the state of deterioration is generally called “aging;” and
the destruction of the body and the end of life are called “death.”
[Third,] to differentiate present seeds is twofold: one approach
straightens their principle by means of the real, and the other approach
explains [them] provisionally by following [their] characteristics.
[According to the approach that] explains [them] provisionally by
following [their] characteristics, each of [the twelve-limbed] elements
penetrates to both seeds and manifestations. In this regard, the
Da$abh^mikas^tr2$2stra states that “ignorance is twofold: one is the
aspect of the seed; the other is the aspect of its result. Up to aging
and death also should be understood in this way.” [According to the
approach that] straightens their principle by means of the real, both
birth and aging and death are not seeds but merely manifestations; the
six elements, such as consciousness, etc., [i.e., name-and-form, the six
sense bases, contact, and feeling,] are not manifestations but merely
seeds; and the elements of ignorance, action, craving and clinging all
penetrate to both manifestations and seeds.
(iii) To discard or establish [the twelve elements] is threefold:

first, to discard or establish all elements by means of universality and
definitiveness; second, to differentiate all elements by means of
unfolding and folding; third, to illustrate the similarity and difference of
the elements by means of period and stage.
[First,] with regard to discarding or establishing the [twelve]
elements [by means of universality and definitiveness], the
Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun, Chapter 8 states as follows:
“Question: Why is the element of aging not established

separately?
Answer: Because it does not definitely exist, it is attached to
death to form an element.
Question: Why is sickness not an element?
Answer: Because it is not universal or definite [in causing
rebirth]. Even though aging is not definite, it is universal, and
for that reason it constitutes an element, because, with the
exception of premature death, all sentient beings in the various
realms, destinies, and forms of birth, undergo a decaying
process.
Question: Even though name-and-form are not universal, why
do they constitute an element?
Answer: They constitute an element because they are definite.
Those born from wombs, eggs, and moisture definitely have
name-and-form as long as their six organs are incomplete. Also,
the element of name-and-form is universal. Even though beings
in the realm of form, and those who are miraculously born,
have the five sense organs when they first experience birth, still
the organs do not yet function, and so, at that time, they are
not designated as an element of the six sense bases. Even
though beings definitely possess the mental faculty when first
born in the formless realm, still they do not perceive clearly, so
it is not called the mental organ.
Question: Why does craving constitute a separate element
even though it does not exist universally? Is it because one
born to an evil destiny does not experience craving?
Answer: It constitutes a separate element because it is
definite and because those born in good destinies who do not
seek nonexistence definitely experience craving.
Question: Does the non-returner necessarily not experience
craving?
Answer: Even though [the non-returners] do not experience
craving [that nourishes rebirth], just as they [still] grasp, they
definitely possess the seeds of craving. Also, craving is
universal, because those born in evil destinies still crave their
present selves and objects. Due to their not having craving that
seek a body in the evil destinies, it is said by the scriptures
that [craving] does not exist, but it is not completely
nonexistent.”
Second, to discriminate [the twelve elements] by means of

unfolding and folding is twofold: one distinguishes unfolding or folding
from that which is projected into rebirth, and the other distinguishes
unfolding or folding from that which is produced and nourished.
According to the [Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun, unfolding or folding can be
distinguished] from that which is projected into rebirth [in this way:]
“What is the reason for establishing birth and aging and

death as that which is engendered, and separately establishing
the five elements of consciousness, etc., as that which is
projected? Since in the causal state specific characteristics are
difficult to know, the five elements [of consciousness, etc.,]
must be separately established on the basis of [their future]
results.”
Thus, the [Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun] describes, “Because the distinct

characteristics of these result states are easy to recognize, the two
elements [of birth and aging and death] are established generally in
order to indicate the three kinds of sufferings.” According to the
[Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun, unfolding and folding] can be distinguished from
that which is produced and nourished [in this way:]
“What is the reason for generally establishing ignorance for

the production of action, and separately establishing craving and
clinging for the state of nourishing action? Even though various
afflictions are capable of producing and nourishing, the power
of ignorance is predominant as such, and continues to increase
when producing action because it fulfills eleven superior
particularities, such as its objects, etc., as extensively discussed
in the [S^tra on the Primacy of the Dharma Gate Distinguishing

Conditioned Arising]. When nourishing action, the power of
craving is especially predominant; it is described as craving
because, like water, it can enrich and, in order to sprout, it
must be watered repeatedly. Also, the two elements of craving
and clinging are distinguished on the basis of the preliminary
and subsequent parts [of the watering process]. The one [cause
of action] of ignorance is established, in which there is no
meaning of production through repetition.”
Third, the similarity and difference of [the elements] is illustrated

in two ways, by means of period and stage: the first [way] illustrates
the similarity and difference by means of stage, and the second
illustrates the similarity and difference by means of period. Regarding
whether the stages of [the twelve elements] are the same or different,
the [Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun] holds that
“These [twelve] elements of dependent arising are all based

on their own stages, but some actions that are produced
depend on the ignorance of another [stage], just as ignorance
of the lower [stage] produces the action of the upper stage. If
it were otherwise, when one first subdued the impurity of a
lower stage, the sam2dhi of the upper stage that had arisen
would not be the element of the action, because the ignorance
of that stage had not yet arisen.”
Regarding whether the periods of [the twelve elements] are the

same or different, the [Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun] holds that
“These twelve elements which consist of the ten causes and

the two results are not necessarily of the same period. Of the
[ten] causes, between the first seven and craving, clinging, and
becoming, some belong to different [periods] and some to
identical ones. If each [group] is necessarily of the same period,
in the case of [the last] two [i.e., birth and aging and death],
the [middle] three [i.e., craving, clinging, and becoming], and
the [rest of the first] seven, a single repetition of cause and
effect in the twelve [elements] sufficiently reveals the karmic
cycle and avoids nihilism and eternalism. There is really no
need to devise a double repetition [as the Lesser Vehicle does],

or else one would have to go beyond those [two] and they
would be extended endlessly [in infinite regression].”
It seems that [the Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun], first, is based on its own

doctrine of a single repetition of dependent arising and, then, criticizes
the Sarv2stiv2din doctrine of a double repetition of dependent arising.
The other aspects [of the twelve limbs of dependent origination] are
extensively described in the [Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun].
[(2e) dispelling the teaching on the Four Noble Truths]
無苦集滅道者
As for “There is no suffering, origination [of suffering], cessation
[of suffering], and the path [leading to liberation],”
This [statement], which is the fifth [section on dispelling

attachment to the six teachings of dharma], is meant to dispel
[attachment to] the teaching of the Four Noble Truths. To what
[purpose] is the teaching of the Four Noble Truths expounded? The
Lotus S^tra [states] that the Four Noble Truths should be expounded in
order to save listeners ($r2vakas). [Yet,] in this [Heart] S^tra, [attachment
to] the Four Noble Truths is dispelled in order to reveal the emptiness
of dharma. With regard to [the interpretation of] the Four Noble Truths,
three aspects are differentiated: (i) Interpreting the name [of the four
noble truths]; (ii) Disclosing the nature of essence [of the four noble
truths]; and (iii) Discriminating the number of varieties [of meanings of
the four noble truths].
[(i)] the name [of the four noble truths] will be interpreted
generally first and then specifically. In explaining the name generally,
“four” indicates the number [of the noble truths], while “truth” has two
meanings: According to the Yog2c2rabh^mi-$2stra, one meaning is that
the characteristics [of the four noble truths illustrated in the
Yog2c2rabh^mi-$2stra] are not separated from each other, and the other
is that by separating from [the four noble truths one can] attain the
ultimate goal. Based on the previous [explanation], one can see that
this is the numerical determinative compound (dvigu). To explain the
name specifically means that the “truth” has four different [names:]
“suffering;” “the origination of suffering;” “the cessation of suffering;”
and “the path leading to the cessation of suffering.” That which consists
of the three kinds of agonies is called “suffering;” it summons a later
result and is therefore called “the origination of suffering;” the
origination of suffering is exhausted and is therefore called “the
cessation of suffering;” finally, it is able to eliminate and penetrate, and
is therefore called “the path leading to the cessation of suffering.”
(ii) In disclosing the essence, [the essence of] “the truth of
suffering” refers to the five aggregates which are defiled; that which can
instigate the karma of delusion is [the essence of] “the truth of the
origination of suffering;” “cessation resulting from the proper
discrimination of dharmas through unconditioned wisdom” is the essence
of “the truth of the cessation of suffering;” and [the essence of] “the
truth of the path leading to the cessation of suffering” is the path
which is sacred and unconditioned.
(iii) In discriminating the various [meanings of the four noble
truths], there are either two or three [kinds of meanings, depending on
perspective]. “Two kinds” means that one is the worldly [truth] and the
other is the ultimate [truth]. Each of these truths contains the four
truths described in the Prakaran2ryav2ca-$2stra, and therefore will not be
discussed here in order to avoid confusion.
The Śr6m2l2-s^tra also describes the two kinds [of meanings of the
four noble truths]: the first is the constructed [four noble truths], and
the second is the unconstructed [four noble truths]. [With regard to the
constructed four noble truths,] due to the afflictive hindrances and the
karmas produced by them, limited birth is instigated, and the fruit of
that instigation is called “the truth of suffering;” that which instigates
the karma of delusion is called “the origination of suffering;” that which
exhausts those sufferings and the origination of suffering is called “the
truth of the cessation of suffering;” and the wisdom that contemplates
the emptiness of the sentient being is called “the truth of the path
leading to the cessation of suffering.” [With regard to the unconstructed

four noble truths,] [based on] undefiled karma as a cause and ignorance
as a condition, karmic retribution accompanied by the instigation of
birth-by-transformation is “the truth of suffering;” that which is able to
instigate the karma of delusion is called “the truth of the origination of
suffering;” when those sufferings and the origination of suffering are
exhausted, it is called “the truth of the cessation of suffering;” the
wisdom that contemplates the emptiness of dharma is called “the truth
of the path leading to the cessation of suffering.”
Question: Even though the attachment to dharma neither produces
karma nor nourishes life unprosperously, and the noble path of the
undefiled is neither the truth of suffering nor the truth of the
origination of suffering, why does the [Śr6m2l2] S^tra say that the
undefiled is a cause and ignorance is a condition?
Answer: According to the Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun, Chapter 8, because
the attachment to dharma and the condition of producing its own result
are cut off, it is said that the undefiled is a cause and ignorance is a
condition. In the principle of truth, the earlier instigation of the karma
of limited birth-and-death, and the fruit of that which is instigated, due
to their self-producing power, transform superiorly and mysteriously,
which is “the inconceivable transformation” described extensively in [the
Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun].
“Three kinds” [of meanings] refers to [the fact] that the two kinds
of the four truths [i.e., the constructed and the unconstructed] both
contain the three natures, namely, the imagined nature, [the dependent
nature, and the perfected nature]. Since one can refer to both the
Madhyant2vibhanga and Chapter 8 of the Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun, which
explain the details, it is not necessary to discuss them here.
[(2f) dispelling the teaching on wisdom and

abandonment]
無智亦無得者
As for “There is no wisdom and no attainment,”
This [statement], which is the sixth [section on dispelling

attachment to the six teachings of dharma], is meant to dispel
[attachment to] the teaching on wisdom and abandonment. To what
[purpose] is the teaching on wisdom and abandonment expounded?
According to the Lotus S^tra, the dharma of the six perfections
(p2ramit2s) is taught for all bodhisattvas. Here, in this [Heart] S^tra, the
teaching on wisdom and abandonment is dispelled in order to reveal
the emptiness of dharma. However, the interpretation of wisdom and
abandonment is twofold: one interpretation is that as the state of cause
it is called wisdom or praj@2, and as the state of result it is called
attainment or bodhi; the other interpretation is that bodhi denotes
wisdom, and nirv2!a refers to attainment. Although there are two
interpretations, the latter is superior because all the Praj@2p2ramit2 s^tras
dispel both bodhi and nirv2!a. [The meanings of] bodhi and nirv2!a shall
be differentiated later.
[3. Revealing the fruit attained]

[a) Clarifying the fruit attained]
[(1) Illustrating the power of contemplation]
以無所得故菩提薩埵依般若波羅蜜多故心無罣礙者

As for “Because there is no attainment, the bodhisattvas depend
on the Perfection of Wisdom (Prajñāpāramitā), and therefore their
minds are free from [mental] obstructions,”
From here [to the end], the third [part of the s^tra] reveals the
fruit attained, which is twofold: first, to correctly clarify the fruit
attained; second, to demonstrate the achievement through examples. The
former, [to correctly clarify the fruit attained,] has two [approaches]: to
illustrate that contemplation has [its own] power, and to reveal the fruit
attained. This [passage discusses] the first [approach, illustrating the
power of contemplation].
This [passage] is threefold: The first [section], “because there is
no attainment,” means to illustrate emptiness apart from [the six]

characteristics, and the true principle of the nature of emptiness apart
from the six teachings of dharma. Revealing the former, [that is, both
emptiness and the true principle of the nature of emptiness,] followed
by the latter, [that is, being apart from both the six characteristics and
the six teachings of dharma,] affirms “no attainment.” In the second
[section], “bodhisattva” refers to the one who converts through
contemplation, as explained earlier. Bodhi denotes “awakening” and
sattva means “sentient beings to be guided;” this means upwardly, to
seek for bodhi, and downwardly, to lead sentient beings to
enlightenment. Thus, one who cultivates the wisdom [of emptiness] and
generates compassion [for sentient beings] is called a “bodhisattva.” The
third [section], “[bodhisattvas] depend on the Perfection of Wisdom and
therefore their minds are free from [mental] obstructions,” shows that
contemplation has [its own] power. The translation of the name and the
interpretation of the meaning [of contemplation] should be understood
as above.
“Praj@2” denotes knowledge as well as wisdom in [the category of]
specific objects. The word “mind” refers to a mind coextensive with
wisdom, which is twofold: namely, nature and characteristic. [Mental]
obstruction refers to the two hindrances of affliction and the known.
From the general interpretation of the meaning, it is said that, because
the true nature of the principle of emptiness is separate from the six
characteristics, bodhisattvas who convert rely on contemplating wisdom,
and [those whose] minds are coextensive with wisdom realize emptiness
and cut off hindrances. This is different from [the idea] that both
ordinary people and the two vehicles [i.e., $r2vakas and pratyekabuddhas]
who attach to existence realize the twofold emptiness internally and cut
off the two hindrances [externally].
[(2) Revealing the fruit attained]
無罣礙故無有恐怖遠離顚倒夢想究竟涅槃者

As for “because [bodhisattvas] have no [mental] obstructions, they
are without fear, free from perversions and dreamlike thoughts, and
achieve ultimate nirvā!a”
This [statement], which is the second [approach clarifying the fruit

attained], is meant to reveal the fruit attained. A version [of the Heart
S^tra] states that “[they are] completely free from all perverted views
and dreamlike thoughts.” Although there are two versions, the latter [in
other words, the new version] is superior.
The fruit attained is fourfold: first, “because [bodhisattvas] have no
[mental] obstructions, they are without fear,” means to be free from all
fears. Fear (bhaya) is of five kinds: according to Chapter 2 of the
Buddhabh^mi-$2stra, “The five kinds of fears are fear of mortality, fear of
infamy, fear of death, fear of evil destiny, and fear of others. All of
these five kinds of fears will be far away from the stage of attaining
the pure and ultimate joy of mind (2$aya).”
Second, “being free from perversion (vipary2sa)” means to be free
from perverted consequences, which are [respectively] of three, four,
seven or eight [kinds]. The three [kinds of perversions] consist of
thoughts (samj@2), views (d#4%i), and [discriminating] mind (citta). The
four [kinds of perversions] consist of [perverting] impermanence as
permanence, suffering as happiness, impurity as purity, and no-self as
self. The seven kinds of perversions are not different from [the
combination of] the three and four kinds of perversions above. The
eight kinds of perversions consist of the above four kinds with an
additional four kinds: while the true principles of the fruit of
Buddhahood are permanence, happiness, selfhood and purity, by
attaching [to them they are perverted to] impermanence, selflessness,
impurity and the inversion of happiness, which is suffering.
Third, “being free from dreamlike thoughts” means to be free
from the fruits of dreamlike thoughts, which are the eight kinds of
illusions. Because these [eight kinds of illusory] thoughts are like
dreams, they are called “dreamlike thoughts.” The Yog2c2rabh^mi-$2stra
designates the eight kinds of [illusory] discriminations and interprets
their meanings [as follows]: because all sentient beings do not clearly
understand the nature of emptiness, that is, suchness (tathat2), as a

causal effect, the three consequences can be originated: first,
sense-organs and cognitive-objects; second, the view of self and
self-conceit; third, desire, hatred and ignorance. Because of desire,
[hatred, and ignorance,] all karmas can be created, sentient beings and
surrounding worlds can be originated, and, in this way, the endless
cycle of life and death (sa8s2ra) is generated. For this reason,
contemplating the emptiness of sentient beings and dharmas, together
with investigations, eliminates the karma of delusion and [leads one]
attain the great bodhi. In this regard, the meaning of the eight [kinds of
illusory] discriminations is summarized in the Yog2c2rabh^mi-$2stra,
Chaper 36, as follows: “Because all ignorant people do not clearly
understand suchness when it is revealed as such, and instead pursue
causal effects, the eight [kinds of illusory] discriminations transform and
can produce the three consequences, which can create entire worlds of
sentient beings and their surroundings.”
What are the eight kinds of [illusory] discriminations? (i)
Self-nature (svabh2va): in entire dharmas, the discrimination of
self-natures such as form and sound, etc. (ii) Particularity (vi$e4a):
within this, the discrimination of what is visible and invisible, etc. (iii)
Grasping general [object]: within this, based on [the discriminations of
self-nature, such as] form and sound, etc., one constructs sentient
being, self, house, army, or forest, etc. (iv) The discriminations of a
self, and (v) what belongs to the self: these two discriminations are all
defiled; by clinging to existence, the self [as “I”] or what belongs to the
self [as “mine”] is constructed. (vi) The discrimination of what is
favorable. (vii) [The discrimination of] what is unfavorable, and (viii)
[the discrimination of] all mutual opposites, from which the
discrimination of, respectively, wondrous, nonwondrous, both and
neither of these, are created.
According to the interpretation of the Tripi%aka [Master,
Hsüan-tsang], the eight kinds [of illusory discriminations] all take as
their self-nature the wisdom produced by the retribution of moral
indeterminacy or that which can be investigated. To produce the three
consequences means that the first three [illusory] discriminations [i.e.,

self-nature, differentiation and attachment to grasping general object,]
can create conceptual elaborations whose bases and objects are the six
organs and six cognitive-objects. The middle two [illusory]
discriminations [i.e., the discriminations of a self and what belongs to
the self] can produce the view of self and self-conceit, and the last
three [i.e., the discriminations of what is favorable, what is unfavorable,
and all mutual opposites illusory discriminations,] produce desire, hatred
and ignorance, respectively. It should be understood that by depending
on bases and objects, [in other words, the six organs and six
cognitive-objects,] the view of self and self-conceit are created, and by
depending on the view of self and self-conceit, desire, hatred and
ignorance are created. [Furthermore,] these three consequences can
constitute the law of sa8s2ra, which consists of sentient beings and their
surrounding worlds. [Regarding] “contemplation,” including the four
investigations, [they] are described in various treatises. According to the
[Heart] S^tra, it means that through wisdom (praj@2), [one] realizes the
emptiness of dharma internally and is free from the perverted view that
[generates] the eight illusory thoughts.
Fourth, “to achieve ultimate nirv2!a” means to attain the fruit of
nirv2!a. To explain nirv2!a, four aspects may be differentiated: (i) to
interpret the name; (ii) to disclose the nature of the essence; (iii) [to
delineate] the kinds [of nirv2!a]; and (iv) to differentiate [nirv2!a]
through questions and answers.
(i) In interpreting the name, the old [version] called it nirv2!a in
Sanskrit or niwon, which may be translated as “tranquil extinction” in
[the Chinese] language. Hsüan-tsang of T'ang China called it parinirv2!a,
which means “perfect stillness” because it is ultimately free from
obstructions, sa8s2ra and disturbances. Yet in order to preserve the
name [used] in the old [version], it is called nirv2!a.
(ii) In disclosing the [nature of] the essence, there are different
views [in the early schools]. For the Sarv2stiv2din school, nirv2!a, both
with remainder and without remainder, takes as its essence the
“cessation resulting from the proper discrimination of dharmas through
unconditioned wisdom,” which has true self-nature. According to the

Sautr2ntika school, the stage wherein afflictions are extinguished is called
nirv2!a with remainder, and the stage wherein the fruits of suffering are
extinguished is called nirv2!a without remainder, which is not real but
provisional. There are two interpretations of these [two types of
nirv2!a]: one is that they take the truth of cessation as their essence,
because the stage in which the karma of delusion is extinguished is
comprised in the truth of cessation; the other is that both [types of
nirv2!a] take their self-natures by means of the truth of the path
leading to the cessation of suffering, because through the
accomplishment of the path, delusions [and afflictions] are extinguished.
Now, in the Mah2y2na [teaching], there are [also] different views
[about nirv2!a]. Dharmarak4ema states that the four kinds of virtues are
the branches [of nirv2!a] and profundity is the root [of nirv2!a]. The
Tripi%aka [Master], Param2rtha expounds that “The Mah2y2na teaches the
four kinds of nirv2!a; three of them are the fruits of the path, but [the
nirv2!a of] original pureness is not comprised in the fruit of the path.”
[He] also expounds that nirv2!a with no fixed abode takes both wisdom
(praj@2) and great compassion (mah2karu!2) for its self-nature.
[However,] all these teachings cannot be discussed [here] at length.
Now, the Tripi%aka [Master, Hsüan-tsang] remarks that the four kinds of
nirv2!a take suchness (tathat2) as their essence. Therefore, the
Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun, Chapter 10, states that the four kinds of nirv2!a are
“established based on the suchness that is free from obstacles.” In
illustrating nirv2!a, that the three elements of “dharma-body,” “praj@2,”
and “liberation” achieve nirv2!a means that wisdom, which is able to
achieve [nirv2!a], intends to achieve suchness, which is free from
obstacles; it does not [mean] that wisdom, which is able to achieve
[nirv2!a], is the self-nature of [nirv2!a].
The different types [of nirv2!a] can be interpreted in two ways.
One is that both the first [i.e., the nirv2!a of original pureness] and the
last [i.e., the nirv2!a with no fixed abode] are suchness, and the two
kinds in the middle [i.e., nirv2!a with remainder and nirv2!a without
remainder] are comprised in the cessation of defilements through the
proper discrimination of dharmas. The other is that the first [nirv2!a] is

suchness and the other three [nirv2!a] are comprised in the cessation of
defilements through the proper discrimination of dharmas. Although
there are two interpretations, the latter is in accord with the principle
doctrine of Dharmap2la.
(iii) In differentiating the varieties [of nirv2!a], there are, briefly,
two kinds and, extensively, four kinds. Two kinds refer to “[nirv2!a]
that is pure by nature” and “[nirv2!a] that is pure by skillful means.”
The extensive four kinds refer to “[the nirv2!a of] the original
pureness,” “[nirv2!a] with remainder,” “[nirv2!a] without remainder” and
“[nirv2!a] with no fixed abode.” According to the Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun,
Chapter 10, the meaning of nirv2!a is divided into four kinds:
(iii-1) “Nirv2!a that is originally pure by nature (an2dik2lika-
$uddha-nirv2!a)” means that although it has adventitious defilements, it
is nevertheless originally pure by nature, endowed with innumerable
subtle and virtuous qualities realized only within by true saints, and
essentially tranquil by nature—hence the name nirv2!a.
(iii-2) “Nirv2!a with remainder (sopadhi$e4a-nirv2!a)” is true
suchness detached from the obstacle of the afflictions. Even though the
support for subtle suffering has not ended, still the obstacle has been
eternally stilled—hence it is called nirv2!a.
(iii-3) “Nirv2!a without remainder (nirupadhi$e4a-nirv2!a)” is true
suchness detached from the suffering of sa8s2ra. The afflictions have
been exhausted, the remaining support is also extinguished, and the
mass of suffering is eternally stilled—therefore it is called nirv2!a.
(iii-4) “Nirv2!a with no fixed abode (aprati4%hita-nirv2!a)” is true
suchness detached from the obstacle of the known. It is always assisted
by great compassion (mah2karu!2) and wisdom (praj@2), and as a
consequence one does not dwell in sa8s2ra or nirv2!a. Benefitting and
gladdening sentient beings, it is eternal in quiescence—therefore it is
called nirv2!a.
All sentient beings possess the first [nirv2!a]. Post-learners of the
two vehicles may possess the first three. Only the World-Honored One
can be said to possess [all] four.
(iv) [Nirv2!a is differentiated] by questions and answers.

Question: How is it that the Sugata [i.e., the Buddha] has
[nirv2!a] with remainder (up2dhi)?
Answer: Although he has no real support, it appears that he has
it. Or, the support of suffering has been exhausted, so he is said to
have [nirv2!a] without remainder. Support which is not the [support of]
suffering remains, so he is said to have [nirv2!a] with remainder.
Therefore the World-Honored One can be said to fulfill the four [kinds
of nirv2!a].
Question: If hearers ($r2vakas), etc., have [nirv2!a] without
remainder, why are there sources (such as the Śr6m2l2dev6 S^tra, etc.,)
which say that they do not have it?
Answer: A source (this also refers to the Śr6m2l2dev6 S^tra, etc.,)
says that they do not have nirv2!a at all. Can it be that they also do
not have [nirv2!a] with remainder? Indeed, while both body and
knowing [i.e., mind] exist in hearers ($r2vakas), etc., they still retain the
obstacle of the known and, since the support of suffering [i.e., the
body,] is not exhausted yet, the sense of perfect stillness remains
obscure, so it is said that they do not have nirv2!a. This does not mean
that they are indeed devoid of nirv2!a with remainder, the true
principle of which is revealed by the exhaustion of the obstacle of the
afflictions. At that time, they still have not realized perfect stillness
without remainder and are therefore also said to not have [nirv2!a]
without remainder. It does not mean that later, when body and
knowing have ceased, they will not have an end to the support of
suffering and nirv2!a without remainder. The details are described in
the [Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun].
Question: Since all obstacles of the known do not instigate birth,
how does one acquire [nirv2!a] with no fixed abode by eliminating
them?
Answer: [The obstacle of the known] is able to veil the true
suchness of the emptiness of dharmas and, therefore, when they are
eliminated, the principle of the emptiness of dharmas is revealed. This
principle is [nirv2!a] with no fixed abode because it prevents one from
abiding in two extremes [of nirv2!a and sa8s2ra].

Question: If the obstacle of the known also obstructs nirv2!a, why
does one not obtain cessation resulting from the proper discrimination
of dharmas by eliminating it?
Answer: Because cessation resulting from the proper discrimination
of dharmas is apart from bonds, and that [obstacle] does not bind one.
Question: That being so, does one acquire nirv2!a by eliminating
that [obstacle]?
Answer: Not all [forms of] nirv2!a are comprised in cessation
resulting from the proper discrimination of dharmas. Otherwise, [nirv2!a]
that is pure by nature would not be nirv2!a. A scripture says also that
it is comprised of cessation resulting from the proper discrimination of
dharmas; the details are described in the [Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun].
For other questions and answers, [the discussion] should be
construed following the principle.
[b) Demonstrating achievement by examples]

[(1) Elucidating the fruit attained]
三世諸佛依般若波羅蜜多故得何耨多羅三藐三菩提者

As for “All Buddhas in the three periods, [past, present, and
future,] through relying on the Perfection of Wisdom (Prajñāpāramitā),
attain supreme, perfect enlightenment,”
From this [statement], which is the second [approach to revealing

the fruit attained], achievement is demonstrated by examples. This is
twofold: first, it elucidates the fruit attained; and second, it praises the
superiority [of praj@2p2ramit2] by means of its function. This [statement]
corresponds to the first, [to elucidate the fruit attained]. The statement
is divided into three parts.
[The first part,] “All Buddhas in the three periods,” illustrates the
persons who attain the fruit. “The three periods” refers to the times of
past, present, and future as conditioned dharma, which means,
respectively, past existence, present existence, and future existence. Or,
“the three periods” refers to the dharmas, respectively, which will not
exist, which are existing, and which have never previously existed. In
this context, the three periods consists of three kinds: the three periods
of seed; the three periods of principle; and the three periods of
consciousness-only. The different doctrines regarding the three periods is
described in their scriptures and should be construed following their
principles. “Buddha” in Sanskrit is translated into “the awakened” who
possesses the five qualities and therefore is named “Buddha.” According
to the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra, these five qualities are: (i) possessing the two
wisdoms (the wisdom of the all (sarvaj@2j@2na) and the wisdom of all
the particulars (sarv22k2r2j@2t2)); (ii) being free from the two obstacles
([the obstacles] of the afflictions, and of the known); (iii) attaining the
two characteristics [of dharmas] (the dharma of the all and the dharma of
all the particulars); (iv) fulfilling the two benefits (self-benefit and
benefit for others); (v) fitting the two metaphors (metaphors of waking
from a sleeping dream, and of the blossoming of a lotus flower). Thus,
the being who fulfills these five qualities is called the “Buddha.”
The next part, “through relying on the Perfect Wisdom,”
distinguishes the [contemplating] wisdom which is able to be attained.
[This] can be understood similarly as above.
The last part, “attain supreme perfect enlightenment
(anuttar2-samyak-sambodhi)” illustrates the fruit attained, that is, bodhi.
The Sanskrit words [anuttar2-samyak-sambodhi] are transliterated as above,
and there are different interpretations for this [passage]. One interprets
that “a (阿)” means “none”; “uttar2 (褥多羅)” refers to “the above;” “sam
(三)” means “perfect;” “yak (藐)” denotes “truth;” “sam (三)” again
means “perfect;” and “bodhi (菩提)” means “path.” In sum, it means “the
supreme, perfect truth and perfect path.” Another interprets that “a
(阿)” means “none;” “uttar2 (褥多羅)” refers to “the above;” “sam (三)”
denotes “perfect;” “yak (藐)” means “universal;” [the next] “sam (三)”
indicates “to know;” and “bodhi (菩提)” means “enlightenment.” That
principle wisdom perceives suchness refers to “perfect (正);” because
discriminating wisdom perceives the ordinary world, it is said to be
“universal;” that non-discriminating wisdom (nirvikalpa-j@2na) cuts off the
two kinds of ignorance is called “to know;” and that bodhi emerges from
the state of sleeping dream refers to “awakening.” These four kinds of
wisdoms are the essence of bodhi and are called “the supreme” because
they surpass the fruit of the two vehicles [i.e., the vehicles of the
disciples ($r2vaka) and the solitary buddhas (pratyekabuddha)].
Now, the Tripi%aka [Master, Hsüan-tsang] of T'ang, interprets that
“a (阿)” refers to “none;” “uttar2 (褥多羅)” means “the above;” “sam
(三)” denotes “perfect;” “yak (藐)” means “equal;” “sam (三)” again
denotes “perfect;” and “bodhi (菩提)” means “enlightenment.” It is called
“the supreme” because no dharmas can surpass it; it is said to be
“perfectly equal” because it omnipresently knows both principle and
phenomena; it is also called “perfect enlightenment” because it is free
from delusion and illuminates truth; in other words, it is the supreme,
perfectly equal, and perfect enlightenment.
Question: In regard to the fruit attained, which indicates the
doctrine [of the Heart S^tra], nirv2!a is emphasized, but in the
demonstration of the achievement through examples, only bodhi is
described. Isn't it contradictory to accomplish cessation by means of
enlightenment?
Answer: The principle of reality interpenetrates all; there is but
one meaning definitively grasped by each of the two virtues of wisdom
and abandonment.
Briefly reflecting on the meaning of bodhi revealed [by the two
virtues], three aspects may be differentiated: (i) interpreting the name;
(ii) disclosing the essence of the nature; (iii) differentiating the various
aspects.
(i) Interpreting the name: Bodhi in Sanskrit is translated as
“enlightenment;” there are three kinds of enlightenment, which
correspond to the wisdom of the three vehicles. Now, this [s^tra]
expounds the supreme bodhi, that is, both ultimate and worldly wisdoms
that realize the twofold emptiness; therefore, it is called
“enlightenment.”
(ii) There are two ways to disclose the essence [of bodhi]. The first
is to disclose the essence by means of the real, in which the four
wisdoms are the nature [of bodhi]. In this regard, Chapter 10 of the
Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun states that bodhi consists in its essence of the classes
of mind associated with the four kinds of wisdom. The second is to
illustrate the characteristics [of bodhi] following the provisional, in which
there are, briefly, three approaches: The first [approach] differentiates
wisdom and abandonment; [bodhi] takes both the wisdom contemplating
the twofold emptiness and the unconditioned attained by cutting off the
two obstacles [of affliction and of the known] for its self-nature. In this
regard, the bodhisattva stages of the Yog2c2rabh^mi-$2stra states that “The
abandonment of the two [obstacles] and the wisdom [contemplating the
twofold emptiness] are called bodhi.” In this [treatise], the abandonment
of the two [hindrances] is called bodhi because it is the fruit of wisdom;
illustrating the characteristics [of bodhi] following the provisional is also
called wisdom. The second [approach] differentiates the three bodies;
[bodhi] generally takes the three bodies for its self-nature. In this
regard, the Mah2y2nasamgraha-$2stra states that “The excellent essence of
wisdom is the three bodies.” According to [the Mah2y2nasamgraha-$2stra],
the Dharma-body (Dharmak2ya) is generally called wisdom because it
represents the nature of wisdom and thus is named wisdom. The third
[approach] differentiates the five dharmas; [bodhi] generally takes the five
dharmas for its self-nature. [In this regard,] the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra says
that “There are five kinds of dharmas which comprise the stage of the
great enlightenment, namely, the four wisdoms and the pure dharma
realm (dharma-dh2tu).” According to [the Buddhabh^mi-s^tra], suchness
(tathat2) is the great enlightenment because it represents the nature of
enlightenment; this is also stated in the Mah2y2nasamgraha-$2stra.
According to the Mah2praj@2p2ramit2-$2stra, [bodhi] is called
enlightenment because it is the cognitive-object of enlightenment.
Therefore, [the Mah2praj@2p2ramit2-$2stra] states that the descriptions of
both wisdom and the realm of wisdom are called praj@2.
(iii) To differentiate various aspects, first, the four wisdoms will be
interpreted, and then the three bodies will be illustrated. Moreover, in
explaining the four wisdoms, five aspects may be differentiated: (iii-1)
the aspect of indicating the names and disclosing the essences [of the
four wisdoms]; (iii-2) the aspect of acquiring [the four] wisdoms

through the transformation of the [eight] consciousnesses; (iii-3) the
aspect of the mental activities associated with [the four wisdoms]; (iii-4)
the aspect of discriminating the objective conditions [of the four
wisdoms]; (iii-5) the aspect of acquiring the first appearance [of the
class of mind associated with the four wisdoms].
(iii-1) The aspect of indicating the names and disclosing the
essences [of the four wisdoms]:
First, the Great Perfect Mirror-Like Wisdom: as the multitudes of
images are reflected by a perfect mirror, so the mirror-like wisdom of
the Tath2gata reflects the multitudes of images of fields,
cognitive-objects, and consciousnesses, and is named by pursuing the
metaphor. It takes the class of mind associated with the eighth [2laya]
consciousness for its essence. There are eleven kinds of similes [of the
Great Perfect Mirror-Like Wisdom] described in the Buddhabh^mi-s^tra.
Second, the Wisdom of Equality: all beings, including oneself and
others, are completely equal. The name is established by pursuing its
function and is called “the Wisdom of Equality.” There are ten kinds
[of characteristics] described extensively in the [Buddhabh^mi-s^tra]. It
takes the class of mind associated with the seventh [manas]
consciousness as its essence.
Third, the Wonderful Observing Wisdom: mental activities
associated with [the Wonderful Observing Wisdom] skillfully contemplate
the distinctive and common characteristics of all dharmas. The name is
established by pursuing its function, and called “the Wonderful
Observing Wisdom.” There are ten kinds of similes [of the Wonderful
Observing Wisdom] extensively interpreted in the [Buddhabh^mi-s^tra]. It
takes the class of mind associated with the sixth consciousness as its
essence.
Fourth, the Wisdom of All‐Accomplishing: it creates the three
actions [of body, speech and mind] and numerous transformations
throughout worlds. It is also by pursuing its function named “the
Wisdom of All-Accomplishing.” There are ten kinds of similes [of the
Wisdom of All-Accomplishing] which are extensively described in the
[Buddhabh^mi-s^tra]. It takes the class of mind associated with the fifth

consciousness as its essence.
(iii-2) [The aspect of] acquiring [the four] wisdoms by the
transformation of the [eight] consciousnesses: according to chapter 3 of
the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra, there are different interpretations by the two
scholars. One interprets that “by the transformation of the eighth [2laya]
consciousness, the Great Perfect Mirror-Like Wisdom is acquired; by the
transformation of the seventh consciousness, the Wisdom of Equality is
acquired; by the transformation of the sixth consciousness, the
Wonderful Observing Wisdom is acquired; and by the transformation of
the [first] five consciousnesses, the Wisdom of All-Accomplishing is
achieved.” The other interprets that “By the transformation of the sixth
consciousness, the Wisdom of All-Accomplishing is acquired; by the
transformation of the five sense consciousnesses, the Wonderful
Observing Wisdom is acquired.” [However, the interpretation of the
latter] does not make sense, because [both the consciousnesses and the
wisdoms] are not in order; to cut off doubts by teaching dharmas is to
extensively observe [all dharmas], because this is not a function of the
[first] five [consciousnesses]. In the Mah2y2nasamgraha-$2stra of
Asvabh2va, there are also two different interpretations; the details are
extensively described there. The Mah2y2nas^tralamk2ra accords with the
second interpretation of the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra; Chapter 10 of the
Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun is in accord with the first scholar's interpretation of
the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra.
(iii-3) [The aspect of] mental activities associated with [the four
wisdoms]: each of [the four wisdoms] is associated with the twenty-one
kinds of the class of mind. These are the five pervasive functions, the
five distinct states, and the eleven goodnesses, which are discussed in
the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra.
(iii-4) [The aspect of] discriminating the objective conditions
(2lambana) [of the four wisdoms:] according to the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra,
there are two different interpretations of the Great Perfect Mirror-like
Wisdom,. One is that [the Great Perfect Mirror-like Wisdom] has [only]
suchness as its objective condition. The other is that [the Great Perfect
Mirror-like Wisdom] has generally entire dharmas as its objective

condition. Although there are two interpretations, the latter is superior.
The Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun, Chapter 10, also illustrates the same [idea] as
[the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra]. It is described in the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra with
further distinctions. Both the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra and the
Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun have three interpretations of the Wisdom of Equality:
one is that [the Wisdom of Equality] has only the purified eighth
consciousness as its objective condition; another is that [the Wisdom of
Equality] has only equal and true suchness as its objective condition;
and yet another is that [the Wisdom of Equality] has the
cognitive-objects of both the ultimate and the worldly as its object
conditions. These are described in both [the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra and the
Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun]. There is no disagreement that the Wonderful
Observing Wisdom has entire cognitive-objects as its objective condition.
There are two interpretations of the Wisdom of All-Accomplishing: one
is that [the Wisdom of All-Accomplishing] has as its objective condition
only the five kinds of present [perceiving] cognitive-objects; the other is
that it has, universally, all dharmas in the three periods of [past,
present, and future] as its objective condition. The latter [interpretation]
is the correct one, as claimed in both [the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra and the
Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun].
(iii-5) [The aspect of] discriminating the first appearance [of the
class of mind associated with the four wisdoms]: according to the
Buddhabh^mi-$2stra, [the class of mind associated with] the Great Perfect
Mirror-like Wisdom first appears when the diamond-like mind is
present [in the bodhisattva]. The class of mind associated with the
Wisdom of Equality appears for the first time in the first bodhisattva
stage [of joy] when contemplation is first present. The class of mind
associated with the Wonderful Observing Wisdom also exists for the
first time in the first [bodhisattva] stage when contemplation is first
present. There are two interpretations of [discriminating the first
appearance of the class of mind associated with] the wisdom of
all-accomplishing: one is that it appears above the first bodhisattva stage;
the other is that it appears when one achieves buddhahood. The latter
is the correct interpretation, and is discussed extensively in the

[Buddhabh^mi-$2stra]. According to the Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun, there are two
interpretations of [discriminating the first appearance of the class of
mind associated with] the Great Perfect Mirror-like Wisdom: one is that
it first appears when the diamond-like mind is present [in the
bodhisattva]; the other is that it appears when one achieves
buddhahood, which is the correct interpretation. [The
Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun] interprets the rest of [of the three wisdoms] in the
same way as the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra.
To explain the three bodies [of the Buddha], seven aspects may
be differentiated: (i) interpreting the names [of the three bodies]; (ii)
disclosing the essences [of the three bodies]; (iii) the five dharmas [i.e.,
the realm of the Dharma (Dharma-dh2tu) and the four wisdoms]
comprising the [three] bodies; (iv) the eternal or transient [of the three
bodies]; (v) the sizes of [the three bodies and their lands]; (vi) what is
common or uncommon [to the three bodies and their lands] for the
beings who are to be guided; (vii) and the distinction between [the
three bodies] and their supporting lands.
(i) Interpreting the names [of the three bodies]:
[The name] will be interpreted comprehensively first and then
specifically. With regard to [the comprehensive interpretation of] the
three bodies, “three” indicates the number [of quantity] and “body” has
the three meanings, which are essence, support, and accumulation. In
this regard, the Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun, Chapter 10, states that “Its meanings
of essence, support, and accumulation are given the comprehensive
name ‘body.’” The Buddhabh^mi-$2stra, Chapter 7, also interprets [the
name] the same way as [Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun]. This is the numerical
determinative compound (divigu) of the six-compounds. Next, with
regard to the specific names [of the three bodies], the first is the
“Essential Dharma Body (Sv2bh2vika-k2ya);” because the essence of
suchness never changes, it is named the “Essential Body;” because all
virtues including power and fearlessness, etc., are supported by [this
body], it is also called the “Dharma Body.” The second is the
“Enjoyment Body (Sambhoga-k2ya);” because it enables self and others to
obtain the enjoyment of innumerable great dharmas, it is called the

“Enjoyment Body.” The last is the “Transformation Body
(Nirm2!a-k2ya);” because [this body] benefits sentient beings and
manifests innumerable transformations and affairs, it is called the
“Transformation Body.”
(ii) Disclosing the essence [of the three bodies]:
The Dharma Body takes true suchness (tath2gata) as its essence,
and the Enjoyment Body takes for its self-nature the four wisdoms, the
virtue of personal benefit, and some virtues of transformation that
manifest in the bodhisattva stages. The similarities and differences [of
the three bodies] will be differentiated extensively in the discussion of
the five dharmas.
(iii) The five dharmas [i.e., the realm of the Dharma (Dharma-dh2tu)
and the four wisdoms] comprising the [three] bodies:
According to the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra, there are two interpretations.
One interpretation is that the first two [i.e., the realm of the Dharma
and the Great Mirror-like Wisdom] comprise the Essential Body; the
middle two kinds [i.e., the Wisdom of Equality and the Wondrous
Observing Wisdom] comprise the Enjoyment Body; and the Wisdom of
All-Accomplishing comprises the Transformation Body. The s^tras (such
as the Suvar@a-prabh2sa-s^tra and the Buddhabh^mi-s^tra) describe true
suchness as the Dharma Body. [The Buddhabh^mi-$2stra] says that the
Essential Body is acquired by transforming the 2laya consciousness, and
the Great Perfect Mirror-like Wisdom transforms the eighth
consciousness so that [the Essential Body] is acquired; therefore, it is
understood that the first two [i.e., the realm of the Dharma and the
Great Mirror-like Wisdom] comprise the Essential Body. (As the
Mah2y2nasamgraha-$2stra illustrates the attainment of the Essential Body,
so both the Mah2y2nasamgraha-$2stra and the Mah2y2na-S^tralamk2ra state
that the Great Perfect Mirror-like Wisdom is acquired by transforming
the eighth consciousness). These s^tras [i.e., the Suvar@a-prabh2sa-s^tra
and the Buddhabh^mi-s^tra,] state that the Wisdom of All-Accomplishing
generates various transformative activities. The Mah2y2na-S^tralamk2ra
states that in entire realms, the Wisdom of All-Accomplishing manifests
the countless, immeasurable, and unimaginable kinds of transformations.

In this context, it is understood that the last one [i.e. the Wisdom of
All-Accomplishing] comprises the Transformation Body (again, refer to
wherein it is described). The Wisdom of Equality, according to the
treatises [i.e., the Mah2y2nasamgraha-$2stra and the
Mah2y2na-S^tralamk2ra], in a pure land, manifests the countless bodies
of a buddha in accordance with the dispositions of bodhisattvas (again,
refer to wherein it is described). The Wondrous Observing Wisdom, also
according to the treatises (such as the Mah2y2na-S^tralamk2ra), in the
great assemblies [of bodhisattvas], can manifest entire masteries and
preach Dharma to eliminate doubts. (As described in the
Mah2y2nasamgraha-$2stra,) it is also said that because the Enjoyment
Body is acquired by transforming all consciousnesses, it is understood
that the middle two kinds [i.e., the Wisdom of Equality and the
Wondrous Observing Wisdom] comprise the Enjoyment Body. In
addition, all three bodies of the Buddha comprise the excellence of
wisdom among the ten meanings [of the three bodies], (namely, the
excellence [of wisdom] described in the Mah2y2nasamgraha-$2stra). It is
therefore understood that the three bodies are wholly made up of
wisdom.
The other interpretation is that the first [the dharma of the five,
i.e., the Dharma-dh2tu] comprises the Essential Body; common beings
associated with the four wisdoms and their self-natures, and some of
the subtle characteristics manifested in bodhisattvas who have already
entered the [ten] stages, comprise the Enjoyment Body; and some of
the coarse characteristics and transformations manifested in bodhisattvas
who have not yet entered the [ten] stages comprise the Transformation
Body. In this regard, both s^tras [i.e., the Suvar@a-prabh2sa-s^tra and the
Buddhabh^mi-s^tra] state that pure Suchness is the Dharma Body, and
the Chan-beul-lun says that the Dharma Body of the Tath2gata is devoid
of origination and cessation. From these descriptions, therefore, it can
be understood that the Dharma Body is the pure realm of the Dharma
(Dharma-dh2tu). Likewise, the Mah2y2na-S^tralamk2ra states that the Great
Perfect Mirror-like Wisdom is the personal Enjoyment [Body] of
Buddha, and the Mah2y2nasamgraha-$2stra states that the Enjoyment

Body is acquired by transforming all evolving consciousnesses. However,
when it is said that the Dharma Body is acquired by the transformation
of the 2laya consciousness, it means that the purity supported by the
Dharma Body is acquired when it is revealed by transforming the seed
of the two hindrances in the eighth consciousness; it does not mean
that the Great Perfect Mirror-like Wisdom is the Dharma Body.
In addition, the Enjoyment Body is of two kinds: one is the
personal Enjoyment Body achieved by one's infinite practices throughout
three immeasurable eons; the other is the Enjoyment Body for others,
in which all bodhisattvas receive the enjoyment of dharma. Therefore,
common beings associated with the four wisdoms and some of the
transformations are the Enjoyment Body. Both scriptures and treatises
state that the Transformation Body manifests innumerable characteristics
in order to guide sentient beings who have not yet entered the [ten
bodhisattva] stages. Because those [characteristics] are in the realm of
sentient beings who have not yet entered the [ten] stages, it can be
understood that these are not true virtues but rather the functions of
transformation. Scriptures and treatises merely state that the Wisdom of
All-Accomplishing can generate the activity of transformation, yet it is
not the Transformation Body. However, although it is said that the
three bodies comprise the excellence of wisdom, because the Dharma
Body is supported by wisdom, and the Transformation Body is
generated by wisdom, and therefore appears to resemble wisdom, it is
not wrong to state that [the three bodies] are provisionally referred to
as wisdom. The Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun does not differ from the above
explanation, and therefore will not be redundantly described [here].
(iv) The eternal and transient [of the three bodies]:
Question: Both the Enjoyment [Body] and the Transformation
[Body] already have [the natures of] origination and cessation. Then,
why do the scriptures state that all bodies of the Buddha are eternal?
Answer: Because the Dharma Body which is the support of the two
bodies [i.e., the Enjoyment Body and the Transformation Body] is
eternal, they are inexhaustible in receiving the enjoyment of dharmas
and are endless in manifesting countless transformations. It is similar to

eternally receiving enjoyments and being provided food, and therefore is
said to be “eternal.” According to the Mah2y2na-S^tralamk2ra, “eternity”
has three [meanings]: first, the eternity of original nature, that is to
say, the Essential Body, because the original nature of this body is
abiding; second, the eternity of endlessness, that is to say, the
Enjoyment Body, because [this body] ceaselessly receives the enjoyment
of dharmas; and third, the eternity of continuation, that is to say, the
Transformation Body, because [this body] inexhaustibly manifests with
repeated coming and going to guide [sentient beings]. The details are
described in [the Mah2y2na-S^tralamk2ra].
(v) The sizes [of the three bodies and their lands]:
The Essential Body, like space, cannot be described in terms of
large or small; yet, by means of the characteristic [of this body], it may
be said that [this body] pervades everywhere. The Enjoyment Body has
a substance which is formless and, because all formless dharmas are
devoid of shape and quality, [this body] also cannot be described in
terms of large or small. Yet, by means of the body that supports, or of
the object of the known, it also can be said that [this body] pervades
everywhere. Form is twofold: one is true form and the other is
transforming form. True form results from practices throughout three
immeasurable eons, is replete in the realm of the Dharma, and pervades
the true Pure Land. It can be known only by buddhas. Transforming
form, by the virtue of the power of compassion, manifests the
innumerable bodies for the hosts of bodhisattvas who enter the great
[ten] stages, and has no definite shape or quality. In order to guide
[sentient beings] who have not yet entered the [ten] stages, it [also]
manifests as the Transformation Body that penetrates both form and
formlessness. Formlessness means no shape, therefore there is no size;
form is indefinite, therefore it is in accordance with the being who is
guided. The details are described in the [Mah2y2na-S^tralamk2ra].
(vi) What is common or uncommon [to the three bodies and their
lands] for beings who are to be guided:
According to the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra, “Sentient beings who are to
be guided may be common to all Tath2gatas or not.” The

Buddhabh^mi-$2stra illustrates this in three ways: one claims [that they
are] only common because all virtues and wishes are the same, which
is extensively described in [the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra]; another claims [that
they are] uncommon because all kinds of sentient beings who are
guided by the Buddha always generate, which is extensively described in
[the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra]; [yet another claims] the correct meaning,
which is that they are both common and uncommon [to all Buddhas],
since it has been the nature of things from beginningless time [that all
sentient beings are related to Buddhas by disposition], and either many
are related to one [Buddha] or one is related to many, which is
extensively described in [the Buddhabh^mi-$2stra]. [The position of] the
Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun is similar to the third interpretation and the matter
should be understood in this manner.
(vii) The distinction between [bodies] and their supporting lands:
According to the Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun, the body is of four kinds: the
Essential Body the Enjoyment Body [which includes the Enjoyment
Body for self-benefit and for others]; and the Transformation Body. The
land is of four kinds: the land of the Essential [Body]; the land of the
Enjoyment [Body] for self‐benefit; the land of the Enjoyment [Body] for
others; and the land of the Transformation [Body]. The above four
bodies abide, respectively, in the four lands. Even though there is no
distinction between the Essential Body and the land of the Essential
[Body] as far as essence is concerned, nevertheless they are related to
the Dharmas of the Buddha, because characteristics and nature differ, so
that their meanings are described in terms of subject and object. The
Transformation Body not only abides in the Pure Land but also
corresponds to the impure land, [in other words, this world,] which is
extensively described in [the Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun].
[(2) Praising the excellence of the Perfection of Wisdom by

means of its function]
[(2a) Interpreting the prose in detail]
[i) elucidating the self-benefit]
故知般若波羅蜜多是大神祝是大明呪是無上呪是無等等呪者

As for “Therefore, one should know the Perfection of Wisdom
(Prajñāpāramitā) as the great sacred mantra, the great illuminating
mantra, the supreme mantra, and the unequaled mantra,”
From here [to the end], the second [part of “demonstrating

achievement by examples”], praises the excellence [of the Perfection of
Wisdom] by means of its function; this has two approaches: the first
approach is to interpret the prose in detail; and the second approach is
to conclude the praise in eulogy. The first approach is twofold: to
elucidate the self-benefit; and to illustrate the benefit for others. This
[statement] is the first one [to elucidate the self-benefit]. What is called
“mantra” refers to incantation; clearly speaking, it means that through
wondrous wisdom, one realizes emptiness and cuts off [the two]
obstacles. [Its] verbal expression requires a wondrous technique, and
therefore to incant a mantra is to praise the excellence of its function.
It is called “the great sacred mantra” because its mysterious function is
unfathomable; it is called “the great illuminating mantra” because it
dispels darkness and eliminates ignorance; it is called “the supreme
[mantra]” because it surpasses [the wisdom of] the other two vehicles
[of $r2vakas and pratyekabuddhas]; it is repeatedly called “unequaled”
because the Buddha's wisdom is impartial and transcends that of
bodhisattvas.
[ii) illustrating the benefit to others]
能除一切苦眞實不虛者
As for “It can eliminate all sufferings, for it is true, not false,”
This [statement] is the second one, “to illustrate the function of

the benefit to others.” The perfection of mysterious wisdom leads
sentient beings to overcome the suffering of sa8s2ra and attain the bliss
of nirv2!a. Since, from tongue to hair, every single word of [the
Buddha] is sincere, then how could his words concerning entire worlds
be false? Therefore, [this] s^tra says that they are true words.
[(2b) Concluding the praise in eulogy]
故說般若波羅蜜多呪卽說呪曰揭諦揭諦波羅揭諦波羅僧揭諦菩提莎

婆呵者
As for “Therefore, [the Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara] speaks the
Prajñāpāramitā mantra: gate gate pāragate pārasamgate bodhi svāhā”
This [statement] is the second [approach of praising the excellence

of the Perfection of Wisdom by means of its function], concluding the
praise in eulogy. This is twofold: the first part of the statement [i.e.,
“Therefore, the Bodhisattva Avalokite$vara speaks the
Praj@2p2ramit2mantra,”] introduces [the eulogy]; and the latter part of it
[i.e., “gate gate p2ragate p2rasamgate bodhi sv2h2”] correctly praise the
eulogy. However, there are different interpretations of this eulogy. One
interprets that this eulogy cannot be translated, as it has been
transmitted from ancient days; this mantra, which represents the exact
sounds of the mysterious Sanskrit verses, would lose its miraculous
effects when translated; therefore, it must be preserved in Sanskrit. In
addition, this mantra is preserved in Sanskrit just like the “Bhagavat”
because [on the one hand] it cites various sacred names or spirits and,
on the other hand, its words contain many meanings, since all dharmas
have deeply profound meanings, and yet there are no appropriate words
with which to translate them into Chinese. The other interpretation is
that all mantras can be translated, such as the word “namobuddhaya (南
無佛陀耶),” etc.
To interpret these verses of the eulogy, one may analyze them by
dividing into three sections: The first section, “gate gate,” means “cross
over, cross over,” which eulogizes the two characters “banya (般若,
praj@2)” in the previous statement. It reveals that praj@2 possesses the
great capability of helping both oneself and others to cross over [the
suffering of sa8s2ra], and therefore it is said, “cross over, cross over.”
The second section, the verses “p2ra … ,” [i.e., p2ragate p2rasamgate

bodhi,] eulogizes “p2ramit2.” This means to arrive at the other shore,
which is nirv2!a. [In terms of] the “gate,” which means to “cross over,”
where does one arrive? It refers to the other shore to which one
crosses over, and therefore it is called “p2ragate.” “P2ra” is translated as
above; “samgate” means to arrive at the ultimate. “Bodhi” refers to the
essence of the other shore. The last [section], “sv2h2,” means “quickly.”
In other words, by means of the wondrous wisdom which has the
function of supreme virtue, [one] is able to arrive quickly at the other
shore of bodhi.
Another interpretation is that this eulogy has four verses which
may be divided into two parts. The first two verses, [i.e., gategate
p2ragate,] praise the excellence [of the Perfection of Wisdom] by means
of the dharma, and the other two verses [i.e., p2rasamgate bodhi sv2h2,]
praise the excellence [of it] by means of the person. [In praising the
excellence] by means of the dharma, the former is the cause, the latter
is the fruit, and the repeated expression of “gate” refers to “excellent,
excellent.” Praj@2 at the stage of a cause fulfills the two kinds of
excellent functions of self-benefit and benefit to others, and therefore it
proclaims “excellent, excellent.” “P2ragate” means the excellence of the
other shore. Because of “praj@2,” one can arrive at the excellent [other]
shore of nirv2!a, and therefore it proclaims “the excellence of the other
shore.” From the perspective of praising [the excellence] of the person,
the former is the cause and the latter is the fruit. “P2rasamgate” means
the excellence of the practitioners of the other shore; it is praising the
bodhisattvas of the one vehicle who are at the stage of cause and seek
nirv2!a. “Bodhi sv2h2” denotes the ultimate realm of enlightenment; it
praises the person who achieves the fruit of the [Buddha's] three bodies
at the stage of results, and whose awakening of dharma is already
fulfilled; this is called the ultimate realm of enlightenment. Alternatively,
the four verses may praise the excellence of the three treasures: the
first two verses, respectively, are understood to praise the dharma of
practice and fruit; the third and fourth verses, respectively, are
understood to praise practitioners and buddhas. Is this not so?
般若心經贊終
The end of the Banya simgyeong chan (the Commentary on the
Heart Sūtra).
Glossary of Chinese Terms

(K=Korean, C=Chinese, J=Japanese, S=Sanskrit, P=Pali)
Abhidharmako$2bh2sya (S) 阿毘達磨俱舍論
Abhidharmasamuccaya (S) 阿毘達磨雜集論
0k4epaka (S) 引
0layavij@2na (S) 阿賴耶識, 阿藜耶識
Amit2bha (S) 阿彌陀佛
An2dik2lika-$uddha-nirv2!a (S) 自性清淨涅槃
Ańga (S) 支
Antar2-bhava (S) 中陰, 中有
Anuttar2-samyak-sambodhi (S) 阿耨多羅三藐三菩提,
Anuttara (S) 無上士
Aprati4%hita-nirv2!a (S) 無住處涅槃
Arhat (S) 應供
Asa!ga (S) 無著
A4%2da$a$^nyat2-$2stra (S) 十八空論
Avalokite$vara (S), Kuan-zizai (C) 觀自在
Avata8saka-S^tra (S) 大方廣佛華嚴經
Avidy2 (S) 無明
0yatana (S) 處
Bandhuprabha (S) 親光
Banya paramilda simgyeong chan (K) 般若波羅蜜多心經贊
Bh2va (S) 有
Bh2vaviveka (S) 清辨
Bhagavan (S) 世尊
Bodhisattvas (S) 菩薩
Buddhabh^mi-$2stra (S) 佛地論
Buddhabh^mi-s^tra-$2stra (S) 佛地經論
Candrasuryapradipa (S) 日月燈明

Ch'eng-wei-shih-lun (C) 成唯識論
Citta (S) 心
D#4%i (S) 見
Da$abh^mikas^tra-$2stra (S) 十地經論
Dh2tu (S) 界
Dharma (S) 法
Dharmap2la (S) 護法
Duhkha-duhkha (S) 苦苦
Dvandva (S) 相違釋
Ekay2na (S) 一乘
Fa-hsiang (C) 法相
G#dhrak^%a (S) 靈鷲山
H#daya-S^tra (S) 心經
H6nay2na (S) 小乘
His-ming (C) 西明
Hsüan-tsang (C) 玄奘
Inwang banya gyeong so (K) 仁王般若經疏
J2naka (S) 能生
J2ti (S) 生
Jar2-marana (S) 老死
Joongbo-Jangum (K) 衆寶莊嚴
K'uei-chi (C) 窺基
K2@c6pura (S) 健至
Kalpa (S) 劫波, 劫
Karatal2ratna (S) 大乘掌珍論
Karmadh2raya (S) 持業釋
Kuan-[shi]-yin (C) 觀[世]音
Kuan-yin san-mei ching (C), Avalokite$vara-s^tra (S) 觀音三昧經
Kuan-zizai (C) 觀自在
Lak4a!a (S) 相
Lokavid (S) 世間解
M2dhyamika (S) 中觀派
M2dhyamika-k2rik2 (S), Chung-lun (C) 中論
Madhy2nt2vibhaga (S) 中邊分別論, 辯中邊論

Madhy2ntavibh2g2bh2sya (S) 中邊分別論頌
Mah2parinirv2!a-S^tra (S) 大般涅槃經
Mah2ratnak^%a-s^tra (S) 寶積經
Mah2y2na (S) 大乘
Mah2y2na-abhidharma-samuccaya (S) 大乘阿毘達磨集論
Mah2y2na-s^tralamk2ra (S) 大乘莊嚴經論
Mah2y2na-sa8parigraha-$2stra (S) 攝大乘論
Maitreyanatha (S) 彌勒
Manas-vij@2na (S) 意識
Mantra (S) 呪, 眞言
M#gad2va (S) 鹿野苑
N2g2rjuna (S) 龍樹
N2ma-r^pa (S) 名色
N6t2rtha (S) 了義
Namobuddhaya (S) 南無佛陀耶
Nirupadhi$e4a-nirv2!a (S) 無餘涅槃
Nirv2!a (S) 涅槃
Nirvikalpa-j@2na (S) 無分別智
Padm2garbh2lok2dh2tu (S) 蓮華藏世界
Par2rtha (S) 利他
Paratantra (S) 依他起性
Parikalpa (S) 遍計所執
Parini4panna (S) 圓成實性
Parinirv2!a (S) 般涅槃
Praj@2 (S), Banya (K) 般若
Praj@2p2ramit2 (S) 般若波羅蜜多
Praj@2p2ramit2-h#daya-s^tra (S) 般若波羅蜜多心經
Prakaran2ryav2ca-$2stra (S) 顯揚聖教論
Pram2!a-samuccaya (S) 集量論
Prat6tyasamutp2da (S) 緣起
Pratiloma (S) 還滅
Pratyekabuddha (S) 緣覺
Prav#tti (S) 流轉
Purusadamy2s2ratha (S) 調御丈夫

R^pa (S) 色
Ratnaketu Tath2gat (S) 普光功德山王如來
Ṣad-2yatana (S) 六入
Saddharma-pu!dar6ka-s^tra-upade$a (S) 妙法蓮華經論, 法華論
Sa8dhinirmocana-s^tra (S), Hae sim-mil gyeong (K) 解深密經
Sa8s2ra (S) 輪廻
Samsk2ra (S) 行
Samsk2ra-duhkha (S) 行苦
Samyak-sambuddha (S) 正遍知
Sa@@2 (S) 想
Ś2riputra (S) 舍利弗, 舍利子
Sarv22k2r2j@2t2 (S) 一切種智
Sarvaj@2j@2na (S) 一切智
Sarv2stiv2da (S) 說一切有部, 有部
Ś2st2devamanusy2n2m (S) 正法明
Ś2stra (S) 論
Satk2rya-d#4%i (S) 薩迦耶見
Sat-samasa (S) 六釋
Sautr2ntika (S) 輕量部
She-li-fu-tuo-luo (S) 奢利富多羅, 舍利弗多羅
Silla (K) 新羅
Skandhas (S) 蘊
Sopadhi$e4a-nirv2!a (S) 有餘依涅盤
Spar$a (S) 觸
Śrama!a-$2stra (S), Sha-men lun (C) 沙門論
Śr2vakas (S) 聲聞
Śr6m2l2-s^tra (S) 勝鬘經
Ś^nyat2 (S) 空
Sugata (S) 善逝
Sukh2vat6vyuha-s^tra (S) 無量壽經
S^tra (S) 經
Suvar@a-prabh2sa-s^tra (S) 金光明經
Svabh2va (S) 性, 自性
T'i (C) 體
T#4!2 (S) 愛
Ta Ming-tu ching (C) 大明度經
Tath2gata (S) 如來
Tathat2 (S) 如如
Tatpuru4a (S) 依主釋
Trim$atik2 (S) 唯識三十頌
Tsung (C) 宗
Up2d2na (S) 取
Up2dhi (S) 餘
Vedan2 (S) 受
Vedan2 (S) 受
Vi$e4a (S) 差別
Vi$esacinta-brahma-pariprccha-s^tra (S) 思益經
Vi4aya (S) 境,
Vidy2caran2sampanna (S) 明行足
Vij@2na (S) 識
Vij@2ptim2trat2-Vim$atik2-k2rik2 (S) 唯識二十論
Vimalak6rti-nirde$an2-s^tra (S) 維摩詰所說經
Viparinama-duhkha (S) 壞苦
Vipary2sa (S) 顛倒夢想
Wonch'uk (K) 圓測
Yog2c2ra (S) 瑜伽, 唯識
Yog2c2ra (S) 瑜伽行派
Yog2c2rabh^mi-$2stra (S) 瑜伽師地論, 瑜伽論
Yung (C) 用
Abbreviation
Taishyō-shinsy-daizōkyō (大正新修大藏經; Japanese Edition of

T
Chinese Tripi%aka). Tokyō: Taishō-Issaikyō-Kankōkai.
References
Ta-chou Hsi-ming ssukuta-te Yuan-ts'e fa-shih fo

she-li t'a-ming ping hsu
Sung-fu
(大周西明寺故大德圓測法師佛舍利塔銘扦序) in
Chin-shi ts'ui-pien. Dainihon zoku zokyo vol.I
Banya paramilda simgyeong chan (般若波羅蜜多

Wonch'uk
心經贊). T.33. No.1711.
“The Task of the Translator.” Illuminations: Essays

Benjamin, Walter
and Reflections. Ed. Hannah Arendt. Trans. Harry
1939
Zohn. New York: Schocken Books. 1969.
“W&nhyo and the Commentarial Genre in

Korean Buddhist Literature.” English Translation
Buswell,
of Complete Works of W*nhyo: Its Significance and
Robert E, Jr.
Issues in the Global Era. Proceedings of the 2nd
2002
International Conference on W&nhyo Studies.
Nov.11‐13. Seoul: Dongguk Univ. Press.
“Wonch'uk ui Banya Simgyeong Chan Yon-ku

Chung,
(The Study of Wonch'uk's Commentary on the
Byung Cho
Heart S^tra).” The Journal of Korean Studies. No.9,
1977
Winter. Seoul: Il Ji Sa.
The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines

Conze, Edward
& its Verse Summary. Trans. Bolinas. Four
1973
Seasons Foundation.
Selected Sayings from the Perfection of Wisdom.

chosen, arranged, and translated, Boulder, Co.
1978
Prajna Press.
A Korean Yog2c2ra Monk in China: Won-Cheuk

Hwang,
and His Commentary on the Heart S^tra.
Chang-geun
Ph.D Dissertation.
2000
Michigan: Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison.
The Scripture on the Explication of Underlying

Keenan, John P.
Meaning (Samdhinirmocana-s^tra. T.16. No.676).
2000
Berkley: Numata Center.
Kim, Young
Tae., and Hankuk Bulgyosa (History of Korean Buddhism).
Wu, Jung Sang Seoul: Sinheung Publishing Co.
1976
Koh, Young-sup
Moon-A Dea-sa. Seoul: Bulkyo-choonchu-sa.
1999
Lopez,
The Heart S^tra Explained.
Donald S., Jr.
New York: State Univ. of New York Press.
1988
Nguyen, “Eminent Korean Monks in Asia: Wonch'uk,

Cuong Tu Wonch'uk's Life and Works.” Moktak; A Korean
2001 Buddhism Reader Vol.1. No.1. New York:
“The Yog2c2ra-Vij@aptim2tra Studies of Silla

Monks.” Assimilation of Buddhism in Korea:
Oh, Hyung-keun
Religious Maturity and Innovation in the Silla
1991
Dynasty. Ed. Lewis Lancaster and C. S. Yu.
Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press.
“Lost in China, Found in Tibet: How Wonch'uk
Powers, John Became the Author of the Great Chinese
1992 Commentary.” Journal of the International
Association of Buddhist Studies. Vol.15. No.1
Skilton, Andrew A Concise History of Buddhism. Birmingham:

1994 Windhorse Publication.

Choo Hyun - Wonchuk's Commentary of The Heart Sutra

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Choo Hyun - Wonchuk's Commentary of The Heart Sutra

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Choo Hyun - Wonchuk's Commentary of The Heart Sutra

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the significance of Wonch'uk's Commentary on the Heart Sutra?

What is the significance of Wonch'uk's Commentary on the Heart Sutra?

What are the main doctrines discussed in Wonch'uk's Commentary?

What are the main doctrines discussed in Wonch'uk's Commentary?

An English Translation

of the Banya paramilda

This paper has attempted to present an English translation of

B. Hyun Choo is a Lecturer of Department of Asian and Asian-American Studies at State

The English translation of Wonch'uk's original Chinese text may offer

Key Words: Wonch'uk, Banya paramilda simgyeong chan, Essence,

The Banya paramilda simgyeong chan (般若波羅蜜多心經贊)1 is a

1. The Heart S^tra

The Heart S^tra (Praj@2p2ramit2-h#daya-s^tra) is undoubtedly one of

and Japan. According to Edward Conze, it was composed around 350

6 According to Conze, Praj@2p2ramit2-s^tras, also known as “Perfection of Wisdom s^tras,” originated

Within the Mah2y2na doctrinal classification, the Heart S^tra

2. The characteristics of Wonch'uk's Commentary on the Heart S^tra

The most distinctive feature of Wonch'uk's Commentary lies in his

s^tra; (4) and an interpretation of the s^tra by analyzing its textual

teachings in all s^tras are not of a hierarchical order but correspond to

12 The original text states: 八萬四千諸塵勞門。是故如來應病設藥。蘊等八萬四千法門由此一一隨其所

1. Illustrating the contemplating wisdom:

a) Indicating the contemplating person

2. Illustrating the cognitive-object contemplated:

a) Illustrating the nature of emptiness

“There is no wisdom and no attainment.”

3. Revealing the fruit attained:

a) Clarifying the fruit attained

Within this structure, Wonch'uk establishes his Commentary by

a methodology that relies on piecing together quotations from a wide

Wonch'uk, through his commentarial work, attempts to make the Word

II. An English translation of the Banya paramilda simgyeong chan

In interpreting the [Heart] s^tra, four aspects may be

I propose humbly that the perfect principle, mysterious and calm,

scriptures [of H6nay2na and Mah2y2na]. The actualizing of the response

“Essence” refers to the core of the teachings that can be

[C.] Explaining the title of the sūtra

In explaining the title [of the s^tra], “the Buddha expounds”

[D.] Interpreting the sūtra by analyzing its textual content

[1. Illustrating the contemplating wisdom]

As for the “Kuan-zizai Bodhisattva”, the first part of [the s^tra],

Now this Bodhisattva, who is truly in the last period of practice

“The Buddha says to 0nanda that now I am telling you the

If this is such a buddha, how is [this buddha] comprehensively

“Good sons, after the period of the true dharma of Amit2bha

In addition, the Larger Sukh2vat6vyuha-s^tra states that the

of Kuan-[shi]-yin for different persons, their teachings do not contradict

[b) Illustrating the contemplating wisdom]

The second [approach,] which illustrates the contemplating

perceive performing, nor perceive non-performing, therefore it is said

[(2) The function of the contemplating wisdom]

This illustrates the function of wisdom, which is twofold: first, for

“The Buddha expounds to Myosaeng that, metaphorically,

harmony based on ‘one taste.’”

Bandhuprabha interprets that “One thousand years ago, the

no ceasing [but] originally stillness, [so that] self-nature is nirv2!a. In

not have self-nature.”

The explanation concerning “contemplation” is as stated above.

色不異空空不異色色卽是空空卽是色者

舍利子是諸法空相不生不滅不垢不淨不增不減者

無無明亦無無明盡乃至無老死亦無老死盡者

以無所得故菩提薩埵依般若波羅蜜多故心無罣礙者

無罣礙故無有恐怖遠離顚倒夢想究竟涅槃者

三世諸佛依般若波羅蜜多故得何耨多羅三藐三菩提者