THE GREAT PRAJNAPARAMITA SUTRA
Chinese translation: Tang Dynasty, Tripitaka Master Xuanzang
– o0o –
VOLUME 34
Section 7: TEACHING AND TRANSMITTING (24)
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “afflicted or unafflicted” of the thirty-two major marks of a great being is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “afflicted or unafflicted” of the eighty minor marks is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as afflicted and unafflicted of the thirty-two major marks of a great being, or afflicted and unafflicted of the eighty minor marks — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “afflicted, unafflicted” of the thirty-two major marks of a great being and the name “afflicted, unafflicted” of the eighty minor marks! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “afflicted or unafflicted” of the thirty-two major marks of a great being is the great Bodhisattva; the name “afflicted or unafflicted” of the eighty minor marks is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “worldly or supramundane” of the thirty-two major marks of a great being is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “worldly or supramundane” of the eighty minor marks is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as worldly and supramundane of the thirty-two major marks of a great being, or worldly and supramundane of the eighty minor marks — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “worldly, supramundane” of the thirty-two major marks of a great being and the name “worldly, supramundane” of the eighty minor marks! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “worldly or supramundane” of the thirty-two major marks of a great being is the great Bodhisattva; the name “worldly or supramundane” of the eighty minor marks is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “impure or pure” of the thirty-two major marks of a great being is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “impure or pure” of the eighty minor marks is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as impure and pure of the thirty-two major marks of a great being, or impure and pure of the eighty minor marks — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “impure, pure” of the thirty-two major marks of a great being and the name “impure, pure” of the eighty minor marks! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “impure or pure” of the thirty-two major marks of a great being is the great Bodhisattva; the name “impure or pure” of the eighty minor marks is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana” of the thirty-two major marks of a great being is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana” of the eighty minor marks is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as belonging to samsara and belonging to nirvana of the thirty-two major marks of a great being, or belonging to samsara and belonging to nirvana of the eighty minor marks — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “belonging to samsara, belonging to nirvana” of the thirty-two major marks of a great being and the name “belonging to samsara, belonging to nirvana” of the eighty minor marks! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana” of the thirty-two major marks of a great being is the great Bodhisattva; the name “belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana” of the eighty minor marks is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “within, without, or on both sides” of the thirty-two major marks of a great being is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “within, without, or on both sides” of the eighty minor marks is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as within, without, and on both sides of the thirty-two major marks of a great being, or within, without, and on both sides of the eighty minor marks — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “within, without, on both sides” of the thirty-two major marks of a great being and the name “within, without, on both sides” of the eighty minor marks! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “within, without, or on both sides” of the thirty-two major marks of a great being is the great Bodhisattva; the name “within, without, or on both sides” of the eighty minor marks is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “obtainable or unobtainable” of the thirty-two major marks of a great being is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “obtainable or unobtainable” of the eighty minor marks is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as obtainable and unobtainable of the thirty-two major marks of a great being, or obtainable and unobtainable of the eighty minor marks — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “obtainable, unobtainable” of the thirty-two major marks of a great being and the name “obtainable, unobtainable” of the eighty minor marks! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “obtainable or unobtainable” of the thirty-two major marks of a great being is the great Bodhisattva; the name “obtainable or unobtainable” of the eighty minor marks is the great Bodhisattva.
Furthermore, Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “dharma of non-forgetfulness” is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “nature of perpetual equanimity” is not the great Bodhisattva?
The Venerable Subhuti replied:
World-Honored One, just as the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “dharma of non-forgetfulness” and the name “nature of perpetual equanimity”! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “dharma of non-forgetfulness” is the great Bodhisattva; the name “nature of perpetual equanimity” is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “permanent or impermanent” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “permanent or impermanent” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as permanent and impermanent of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or permanent and impermanent of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “permanent, impermanent” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “permanent, impermanent” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “permanent or impermanent” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “permanent or impermanent” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “pleasurable or suffering” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “pleasurable or suffering” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as pleasurable and suffering of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or pleasurable and suffering of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “pleasurable, suffering” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “pleasurable, suffering” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “pleasurable or suffering” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “pleasurable or suffering” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “self or no-self” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “self or no-self” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as self and no-self of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or self and no-self of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “self, no-self” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “self, no-self” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “self or no-self” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “self or no-self” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “pure or impure” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “pure or impure” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as pure and impure of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or pure and impure of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “pure, impure” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “pure, impure” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “pure or impure” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “pure or impure” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “empty or not-empty” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “empty or not-empty” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as empty and not-empty of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or empty and not-empty of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “empty, not-empty” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “empty, not-empty” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “empty or not-empty” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “empty or not-empty” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “with-signs or signless” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “with-signs or signless” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as with-signs and signless of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or with-signs and signless of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “with-signs, signless” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “with-signs, signless” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “with-signs or signless” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “with-signs or signless” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “with-wishes or wishless” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “with-wishes or wishless” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as with-wishes and wishless of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or with-wishes and wishless of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “with-wishes, wishless” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “with-wishes, wishless” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “with-wishes or wishless” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “with-wishes or wishless” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “tranquil or not-tranquil” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “tranquil or not-tranquil” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as tranquil and not-tranquil of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or tranquil and not-tranquil of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “tranquil, not-tranquil” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “tranquil, not-tranquil” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “tranquil or not-tranquil” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “tranquil or not-tranquil” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “remote or not-remote” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “remote or not-remote” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as remote and not-remote of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or remote and not-remote of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “remote, not-remote” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “remote, not-remote” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “remote or not-remote” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “remote or not-remote” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “conditioned or unconditioned” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “conditioned or unconditioned” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as conditioned and unconditioned of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or conditioned and unconditioned of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “conditioned, unconditioned” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “conditioned, unconditioned” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “conditioned or unconditioned” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “conditioned or unconditioned” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “defiled or undefiled” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “defiled or undefiled” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as defiled and undefiled of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or defiled and undefiled of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “defiled, undefiled” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “defiled, undefiled” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “defiled or undefiled” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “defiled or undefiled” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “arising or ceasing” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “arising or ceasing” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as arising and ceasing of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or arising and ceasing of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “arising, ceasing” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “arising, ceasing” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “arising or ceasing” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “arising or ceasing” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “wholesome or unwholesome” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “wholesome or unwholesome” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as wholesome and unwholesome of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or wholesome and unwholesome of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “wholesome, unwholesome” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “wholesome, unwholesome” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “wholesome or unwholesome” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “wholesome or unwholesome” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “faulty or faultless” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “faulty or faultless” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as faulty and faultless of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or faulty and faultless of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “faulty, faultless” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “faulty, faultless” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “faulty or faultless” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “faulty or faultless” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “afflicted or unafflicted” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “afflicted or unafflicted” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as afflicted and unafflicted of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or afflicted and unafflicted of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “afflicted, unafflicted” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “afflicted, unafflicted” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “afflicted or unafflicted” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “afflicted or unafflicted” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “worldly or supramundane” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “worldly or supramundane” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as worldly and supramundane of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or worldly and supramundane of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “worldly, supramundane” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “worldly, supramundane” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “worldly or supramundane” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “worldly or supramundane” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “impure or pure” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “impure or pure” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as impure and pure of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or impure and pure of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “impure, pure” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “impure, pure” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “impure or pure” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “impure or pure” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as belonging to samsara and belonging to nirvana of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or belonging to samsara and belonging to nirvana of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “belonging to samsara, belonging to nirvana” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “belonging to samsara, belonging to nirvana” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “within, without, or on both sides” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “within, without, or on both sides” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as within, without, and on both sides of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or within, without, and on both sides of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “within, without, on both sides” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “within, without, on both sides” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “within, without, or on both sides” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “within, without, or on both sides” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “obtainable or unobtainable” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “obtainable or unobtainable” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as obtainable and unobtainable of the dharma of non-forgetfulness, or obtainable and unobtainable of the nature of perpetual equanimity — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “obtainable, unobtainable” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness and the name “obtainable, unobtainable” of the nature of perpetual equanimity! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “obtainable or unobtainable” of the dharma of non-forgetfulness is the great Bodhisattva; the name “obtainable or unobtainable” of the nature of perpetual equanimity is the great Bodhisattva.
Furthermore, Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “omniscience” is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge” is not the great Bodhisattva?
The Venerable Subhuti replied:
World-Honored One, just as omniscience, path-aspect knowledge, and all-aspect knowledge — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “omniscience, path-aspect knowledge, all-aspect knowledge”! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “omniscience” is the great Bodhisattva; the name “path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge” is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “permanent or impermanent” of omniscience is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “permanent or impermanent” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as permanent and impermanent of omniscience, or permanent and impermanent of path-aspect knowledge and all-aspect knowledge — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “permanent, impermanent” of omniscience and the name “permanent, impermanent” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “permanent or impermanent” of omniscience is the great Bodhisattva; the name “permanent or impermanent” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “pleasurable or suffering” of omniscience is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “pleasurable or suffering” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as pleasurable and suffering of omniscience, or pleasurable and suffering of path-aspect knowledge and all-aspect knowledge — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “pleasurable, suffering” of omniscience and the name “pleasurable, suffering” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “pleasurable or suffering” of omniscience is the great Bodhisattva; the name “pleasurable or suffering” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “self or no-self” of omniscience is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “self or no-self” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as self and no-self of omniscience, or self and no-self of path-aspect knowledge and all-aspect knowledge — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “self, no-self” of omniscience and the name “self, no-self” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “self or no-self” of omniscience is the great Bodhisattva; the name “self or no-self” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “pure or impure” of omniscience is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “pure or impure” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as pure and impure of omniscience, or pure and impure of path-aspect knowledge and all-aspect knowledge — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “pure, impure” of omniscience and the name “pure, impure” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “pure or impure” of omniscience is the great Bodhisattva; the name “pure or impure” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “empty or not-empty” of omniscience is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “empty or not-empty” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as empty and not-empty of omniscience, or empty and not-empty of path-aspect knowledge and all-aspect knowledge — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “empty, not-empty” of omniscience and the name “empty, not-empty” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “empty or not-empty” of omniscience is the great Bodhisattva; the name “empty or not-empty” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “with-signs or signless” of omniscience is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “with-signs or signless” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as with-signs and signless of omniscience, or with-signs and signless of path-aspect knowledge and all-aspect knowledge — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “with-signs, signless” of omniscience and the name “with-signs, signless” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “with-signs or signless” of omniscience is the great Bodhisattva; the name “with-signs or signless” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “with-wishes or wishless” of omniscience is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “with-wishes or wishless” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as with-wishes and wishless of omniscience, or with-wishes and wishless of path-aspect knowledge and all-aspect knowledge — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “with-wishes, wishless” of omniscience and the name “with-wishes, wishless” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “with-wishes or wishless” of omniscience is the great Bodhisattva; the name “with-wishes or wishless” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “tranquil or not-tranquil” of omniscience is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “tranquil or not-tranquil” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as tranquil and not-tranquil of omniscience, or tranquil and not-tranquil of path-aspect knowledge and all-aspect knowledge — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “tranquil, not-tranquil” of omniscience and the name “tranquil, not-tranquil” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “tranquil or not-tranquil” of omniscience is the great Bodhisattva; the name “tranquil or not-tranquil” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “remote or not-remote” of omniscience is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “remote or not-remote” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as remote and not-remote of omniscience, or remote and not-remote of path-aspect knowledge and all-aspect knowledge — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “remote, not-remote” of omniscience and the name “remote, not-remote” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “remote or not-remote” of omniscience is the great Bodhisattva; the name “remote or not-remote” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “conditioned or unconditioned” of omniscience is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “conditioned or unconditioned” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as conditioned and unconditioned of omniscience, or conditioned and unconditioned of path-aspect knowledge and all-aspect knowledge — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “conditioned, unconditioned” of omniscience and the name “conditioned, unconditioned” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “conditioned or unconditioned” of omniscience is the great Bodhisattva; the name “conditioned or unconditioned” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “defiled or undefiled” of omniscience is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “defiled or undefiled” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as defiled and undefiled of omniscience, or defiled and undefiled of path-aspect knowledge and all-aspect knowledge — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “defiled, undefiled” of omniscience and the name “defiled, undefiled” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “defiled or undefiled” of omniscience is the great Bodhisattva; the name “defiled or undefiled” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “arising or ceasing” of omniscience is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “arising or ceasing” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as arising and ceasing of omniscience, or arising and ceasing of path-aspect knowledge and all-aspect knowledge — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “arising, ceasing” of omniscience and the name “arising, ceasing” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “arising or ceasing” of omniscience is the great Bodhisattva; the name “arising or ceasing” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is the great Bodhisattva.
Subhuti, upon what meaning did you contemplate to say that the name “wholesome or unwholesome” of omniscience is not the great Bodhisattva; the name “wholesome or unwholesome” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is not the great Bodhisattva?
World-Honored One, just as wholesome and unwholesome of omniscience, or wholesome and unwholesome of path-aspect knowledge and all-aspect knowledge — these are ultimately unobtainable, because their nature is non-existent — how much less is there the name “wholesome, unwholesome” of omniscience and the name “wholesome, unwholesome” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge! Since these names are already non-existent, how could one say that the name “wholesome or unwholesome” of omniscience is the great Bodhisattva; the name “wholesome or unwholesome” of path-aspect knowledge or all-aspect knowledge is the great Bodhisattva.
– o0o –
End Of Volume 34