---
title: "大品經義疏 · 等空品第二十三"
description: "大品經義疏由隋唐高僧吉藏撰寫，是對《大品般若經》的重要註釋著作。吉藏是三論宗的創始人，以中觀思想聞名，該疏融合了龍樹中觀學說與中國佛教特色，系統闡釋般若空性思想。內容涵蓋經文逐句解析、名相辨析及修行實踐指導，展現了隋唐佛教義學的嚴密邏輯。作為中國佛教史上關鍵的般若經典疏解，它不僅推動了三論宗的發展，也為後世研究大乘空觀提供了權威依據，在漢傳佛教思想史中佔有重要地位。"
url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cmcxdogg603uxk404rkdd49k7"
---

### 等空品第二十三

> Chapter 23: Equal to Emptiness

等空品常云：乘是萬行，萬行是有，不可與空等。若真諦遣，故無萬行，無可與空等。今明品萬行宛然而畢竟空，故與空等，可謂空萬行，空萬行，空如三事，宛然無三事。論下釋言：菩薩從無生忍，不復分別知施無所施。若未得無生忍，則謂萬行異空，空有二故，未是真實乘也。問：若得無生故萬行空者，若爾，非是乘本來與空等。答：乘本與空等，於未得無生人，自謂不等等。此品初述其第二等空歎故。用目品：問：何故虗空等？解云：與世間虗空等。世間虗空已破，經論所破，誰論此耶？故摩訶衍與般若虗空等，般若空亦令與般若大乘等。

> The "Equal to Emptiness" chapter often says: Riding on the myriad practices—but the myriad practices are things that exist, so they cannot be equal to Emptiness. If ultimate truth does away with them, then there are no myriad practices, and there is nothing to be equal to Emptiness. Now this chapter clarifies that the myriad practices, while appearing fully present, are ultimately empty—and so they are equal to Emptiness. This can be called: the myriad practices are empty, and emptiness is the myriad practices; emptiness and the myriad practices are one reality, appearing as three yet without any three. The treatise explains below: a bodhisattva who has attained the acceptance of non-arising no longer discriminates, knowing that giving has no giver. But if one has not yet attained the acceptance of non-arising, one thinks the myriad practices are different from Emptiness—because one holds that Emptiness and things both exist—and so it is not yet the true Vehicle. Question: If one attains non-arising, and thus the myriad practices are empty—then in that case, it is not that the Vehicle was originally equal to Emptiness. Answer: The Vehicle is originally equal to Emptiness; it is only that those who have not attained non-arising call it unequal themselves. The beginning of this chapter describes the second kind—those who praise this equal Emptiness—and so uses it to title the chapter. Question: Why is it called "equal to empty space"? Explanation: It is equal to empty space in the world. But worldly empty space has already been refuted by the sutras and treatises—who talks about that? Therefore, the Great Vehicle is equal to the emptiness of prajna, and this emptiness of prajna also causes it to be equal to the Great Vehicle of prajna.

就文又四：第一、歎；如是如是下，第二、正述。云須菩提！如虗空無東方下，第三、歎述歎。凡舉二十二種歎類能，由來乘是萬善有為有法，並不得舉此二十二為類云云。彼解云：皆是假設狂稱歎。若作如此言：及佛重熱，但汝解佛，菩薩不解。大乘實不爾，無氣味也。須菩提！以是因緣故下，第四、結歎云云。

> The text has four parts: First, the praise: "Thus, thus" and what follows. Second, the main explanation: "Subhuti, just as space has no east..." Third, the praise of the explanation and the explanation of the praise. In general, twenty-two kinds of praise are presented to describe the capacity \[of this teaching\]. Originally, because they proceed from the ten thousand wholesome deeds—conditioned and conditioned dharmas—none of them can be cited as these twenty-two categories. Their interpretation says: all of these are hypothetical, extravagant expressions of praise. If one speaks in this way—that the Buddha is again fervent, but you understand the Buddha while bodhisattvas do not—the Great Vehicle is truly not like this; it has no flavor at all. "Subhuti, for this reason" and what follows: fourth, the concluding praise.

次述其第三含受歎。由來摩訶衍是萬善，乃可令受行眾生，云何能含受一切眾生及一切法？彼解云：是少分為言實錄，唯含受有著之人，不含受一切眾生及一切法。此則反佛語及龍樹意。今明摩訶衍非凡非聖，而凡聖皆含，非人非法皆含受。又中法空喻者，非世所解三無為中為虗空世人，所以虗空與萬法君含受萬法。今云虗空者，如經云：亦名佛性，亦名如來法身，亦名涅槃虗空。故般若虗空、摩訶衍虗空及能含受一切法。摩訶衍虗空既能含受一切，摩訶衍亦爾，故摩訶衍與虗空不二不別。今作異若說，然善吉二歎，一云乘與空等，次云乘如空含受。佛述則異，述等空明乘與空等，含述含受則云無有虗空。所以然者，正言空非有有無四句，內外如此空方能含受，亦如此空乘與空等，故此義不異但小。既明等空，則恐有空可等、有空能受，故今明不見空，方是空受、方是等空也。問：既不見空不空，四句內外皆不可得，有能含受耶？答：一切法皆不出此法，皆四句內。答：一切法不出，不出此法者，汝問云：既不見空不空，四句內外皆不可得，云何能含受？今云一切皆非空非有，非四句內外無有一法不如此者，故云不出此法也。既問一切同如此，非空有，非四句內外無礙，何意不容不受耶？是故一切法含受故空也。問：一切法皆畢竟淨，衍與空亦畢竟淨，既云空能含衍、能含一切法，何故不云一切法含衍、含空耶？答：亦得。此是一切衍衍一切法空一切法空一切法空但今為歎衍，故云衍含也。問：一切法皆畢竟空，則無異不異、含不含，何故云含耶？答：今畢竟空為衍，以一切法亦空故入衍中，故云含也。然衍與一切法皆畢竟空不可得，何有含不含耶？

> Next, we explain the third part: "containing and receiving," along with the praise. Traditionally, the Mahayana is all-encompassing good, and only then can it lead all beings to practice it. How can it contain and receive all beings and all dharmas? Their interpretation says: this is spoken in a limited sense; in reality, it only contains and receives those attached to existence, not all beings and all dharmas. This contradicts the Buddha's words and Nagarjuna's intent. Now we clarify: the Mahayana is neither ordinary nor noble, yet it contains both ordinary and noble; it is neither person nor dharma, yet it contains and receives both. Also, regarding the analogy of emptiness in the Middle Way: it is not the emptiness understood by the world as one of the three unconditioned dharmas. Worldly people think space contains and receives all dharmas. Now, what we call space is, as the sutra says, also called Buddha-nature, also called the Tathagata's Dharma-body, also called nirvana-space. Therefore, the emptiness of prajna, the emptiness of the Mahayana, can contain and receive all dharmas. Since the emptiness of the Mahayana can contain and receive everything, the Mahayana itself is the same. Thus, the Mahayana and space are neither two nor different. Now, if we speak of them as different, note that Subhuti's two praises: first, he says the vehicle is equal to space; next, he says the vehicle, like space, contains and receives. The Buddha's response differs: in response to equality with space, he clarifies that the vehicle is equal to space; in response to containing and receiving, he says there is no space. Why? Because truly speaking, space is not being, not non-being, beyond the four extremes. Only such space, inside and outside, can contain and receive. Likewise, such space is equal to the vehicle. Thus, this meaning is not different, only slightly so. Since it is clear that it is equal to space, one might fear there is a space to be equal to, a space that can receive. So now we clarify: not seeing space is precisely space receiving, precisely being equal to space. Question: Since one does not see space or non-space, and the four extremes, inside and outside, are all unattainable, is there something that can contain and receive? Answer: All dharmas do not go beyond this dharma; all are within the four extremes. Answer: All dharmas do not go beyond, do not go beyond this dharma. Your question: Since one does not see space or non-space, and the four extremes, inside and outside, are all unattainable, how can it contain and receive? Now we say: all is neither empty nor existent, not within the four extremes or outside; there is not a single dharma that is not like this. Therefore, it is said to not go beyond this dharma. Since you ask whether all is like this, neither empty nor existent, not within the four extremes or outside, without obstruction—why would it not contain and receive? Therefore, all dharmas are contained and received, hence empty. Question: All dharmas are ultimately pure; the vehicle and space are also ultimately pure. Since it is said space can contain the vehicle and all dharmas, why not say all dharmas contain the vehicle and contain space? Answer: That also holds. This is all vehicles, all dharmas, all emptiness, all dharmas, all emptiness, all dharmas, all emptiness. But now, to praise the vehicle, we say the vehicle contains. Question: All dharmas are ultimately empty, so there is no same or different, no containing or not containing. Why say "contains"? Answer: Now, ultimate emptiness is the vehicle; because all dharmas are also empty, they enter the vehicle. Therefore, we say "contains." Yet the vehicle and all dharmas are ultimately empty and unattainable—how can there be containing or not containing?

就文又二：第一、歎，二、正歎述。歎述中，北人以為六義云云。今直為四：第一、舉虗空為歎，第二、阿僧祇為歎，第三、舉乘為歎，第四、舉涅槃為歎。若虗空、阿僧乘及涅槃，若體是有，有則隔礙不能含。正言虗空非是有，故含受一切。餘三亦然。皆舉所信類所不信，明一切無所有名為大乘，故能含一切也。若爾耳，但含一切眾生，亦含受一切法無所有，何但名摩訶衍含受？亦得名虗空含受，亦得名眾生含受。但今歎摩訶衍故，一切無所有名為摩訶衍。既一切無所有，則無能含與所含。但一切同入無所有故，名為摩訶衍含受一切。次第二、舉阿僧祇無所有類一切無所有。我無所有下，第三、舉我無所有類一切無所有。此舉聲聞人所信類所不信。就文九復次：初復次、舉我類如此性等，乃至第九復次、舉我類三乘人同無所有。譬如須菩提！涅槃中下，第四、舉涅槃涅槃性為類。此亦舉所信類所不信也二不論云云。

> This passage has two parts: first, praise; second, the actual expression of praise. Within the expression of praise, scholars from the north divided it into six meanings. Here, I will simply present it as four: first, using space as praise; second, using "immeasurable" as praise; third, using the vehicle as praise; fourth, using Nirvana as praise. If space, the immeasurable, and Nirvana were things that truly existed, then existing would mean they are limited and obstruct one another, unable to contain anything. But precisely because space is not a thing that exists, it can contain and embrace everything. The other three are the same. All of these use what is believed in to parallel what is not believed in, showing that "all that has no existence" is called the Great Vehicle, and therefore it can contain everything. If that is so, then just as it contains all living beings, it also contains all phenomena that have no existence. Why then is it only called the Great Vehicle's containing and embracing? It could equally be called space's containing and embracing, or living beings' containing and embracing. But here, since we are praising the Great Vehicle, "all that has no existence" is called the Great Vehicle. Since all is without existence, there is no container and nothing contained. Simply because all equally enters into non-existence, it is called the Great Vehicle containing and embracing everything. Next, the second: using the immeasurable's non-existence to parallel all non-existence. "Within my non-existence" — third: using my non-existence to parallel all non-existence. This uses what the hearers of the teachings believe in to parallel what they do not believe in. In this passage there are nine further rounds: the first round uses "I" to parallel such natures and so on, up to the ninth round, which uses "I" to parallel the three vehicles' people as all equally non-existent. "Subhuti, within Nirvana..." — fourth: using Nirvana and the nature of Nirvana as the parallel. This too uses what is believed in to parallel what is not believed in.

次述其第四無來去歎。前歎，次正述。正述中又三：第一總述一切法並無去來，第二別釋一切法皆無來去，第三結為摩訶衍無來去。今是第一，先正述，次何以故下釋，明一切法皆不動故，皆無來無去無住。若爾，一切法皆大乘。何以故須菩提第一無所從下，第二別釋一切法無來無去無住。就文凡舉十科：一五陰、二十二入、三六種、四如實際、五六度等門、六菩薩、七佛、八菩提、九有為法、十無為法。此十科法一一各有五義，謂色、色法、色如、色性、色相。就五義中一一各三義，謂不來不去無住。五義者，一色，謂十一十四及明無所對，凡夫見為色也。二色法，知其色無常生滅即二乘。三色如，知色無生滅非常無常，菩薩觀也。所以名如者，現在色既無生滅，過去未來亦如是也。又云佛觀色既如此，菩薩觀色亦如佛，故云如也。四色性者，色性本來不生非度故無生滅，性如此故云性也。五色相，何以故知其無生滅性不耶？見其相壞敗不有，故知其生滅也。色五義既爾，四陰五義亦爾，乃至無為法五義亦爾，皆不來不去不住。一切既爾，即是大乘不來不去不住。以是因緣故下一行餘，即第二結大乘不來不去不住。由來大乘是因中萬善，云何不來不去不住？彼云是真諦，是今用遣何為？即一切不來不去不住是大乘，大乘相如此也。

次述第五無三世歎。若有來，則有未來；若有去，則有過去；若有住，則現在前。既無來、無去、無住，則出過三世，無未來、過去、現在。由來大涅槃、華嚴，自可非三世。大乘與般若，並是因中行，為三世所攝。今則不然，般若是一法，佛說種種名，故一切並過去、非未來、非現在、亦非三世。就文，先歎，次正述。正述中又四：第一、就法空義述歎；第二、就眾生空義述歎；第三、勸修；第四、結歎。就初又五：第一、就不可得空述。就中有正述及以何故釋。摩訶空等下，第二、就自相空述。亦有正述及何以故釋。既自相空，豈大乘為？菩薩為二？大乘空為三？菩薩空為四？豈有三世空為忍？豈有三世空為異？問：此中云三世平等歎，何故云等、不等皆不可得？答曰：歎亦應不見勝、出、不出，乃至最後不見去、來、不去、來。但今既最後收卷，故云不見等、不等也。是菩薩摩訶衍，是衍中等、不等不可得下，第三、就性空述。亦有正述及何以故釋。須菩提！過去檀不可得下，第五、就平等空述諸行悉平等，亦有正述及何以故釋。復次須菩提！過去凡夫人，第二、就生空義述歎，亦有正述及何以故釋。如是須菩提！菩薩住般若中學等相當具足一切種智，即第二、何以故釋。但學品應云住大乘中學三等相當得一切種智，云何言住般若中耶？釋云：所謂般若摩訶衍、摩訶衍般若、大乘、大乘般若，學三世平等則能得一切種智。是名菩薩下，第四、結歎三世。初結五歎中第五、三世平等歎，後句結五歎中第一句勝出歎。爾時須菩提白佛下兩品中，第二、歎衍出生三世諸佛一切智。由來云依涅槃圓修滿字學乃可得道，依此半字無常不可教學不能得道，必須攝涅槃方得道。就文又二：第一、善吉正歎能生三世十方諸佛一切種智，可謂好大乘。佛告下，第二、如來述歎云云。若他五時義定是則得，須菩提與佛不曾護、不解義，不及今人