---
title: "大品經義疏 · 深奧品第五十七"
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/cmcxdoh45044vk404i67axbfj"
---

### 深奧品第五十七

> Chapter 57

此品四，是第三、歎阿󳺎人行德無邊也。深奧者，論中歎阿󳺎人所行處甚深淵奧。作名師有時云：借喻入海斯潮奧避有無斷見也。如入海中大風起入潮奧中避之，今有斷少風起即入深奧中避之，故云深奧品也。為三：第一、明自行功德無邊；二、明化他功德無邊；三、雙成二行得成。所以然者，欲明菩薩運心則前人後己，應前化他後己、應前化他後自行。今先自行後化他者，但要須自行得成就後能化他也。此是為他故修自行，若不為化他則不須自行，此乃是他得也。然自行化他二行成者，要由學空不證故，不墮二乘地亦不墮凡夫地，然後二行方得成耳，故第三、釋二行也。

> This is the fourth chapter, and the third section praises the boundless virtue of the Arhat's practice. “Deep and profound” refers to the treatise's praise of the Arhat's realm of practice as extremely deep and abstruse. Master Zuo once said: “Using the metaphor of entering the sea, the tidal depths avoid the extremes of existence and non-existence.” Just as when a great wind rises in the sea, one enters the tidal depths to avoid it, so when the winds of existence and non-existence arise, one enters the deep and profound to avoid them—hence the name “Chapter on the Deep and Profound.” This is divided into three parts: first, clarifying that self-practice has boundless merit; second, clarifying that benefiting others has boundless merit; third, showing how both practices together are accomplished. Why this order? To show that when a bodhisattva sets his mind, he puts others before himself. One might expect that benefiting others should come first and self-practice second, but here self-practice comes first and benefiting others second—because self-practice must first be accomplished before one can benefit others. This self-practice is undertaken for the sake of others; if it were not for benefiting others, self-practice would be unnecessary. Thus it is for the sake of others. However, for both self-practice and benefiting others to be accomplished, one must study emptiness without grasping it, thereby not falling into the level of the two vehicles nor into the level of ordinary beings. Only then can both practices be fulfilled. Hence the third part explains the two practices.

初三：第一、明因行無邊；二、明因行無邊故得菩提果；第三、釋疑破以成上義。初中為三：第一、正歎菩薩因行無邊；第二、格量顯勝；三者、釋成勝義。初三：第一、因上二作三種秤歎；二者、釋成三歎；第三、明菩薩秤理脩行功德無邊也。初中須菩提作三歎，次佛述所以。設三歎者，此中所歎猶是上二品所明功德也。但此大士功行無量，若當曲辨其相則窮劫不能盡，將欲問其玄根振其對要，故總作三歎也。次佛述，如文。何以故下，第三、釋成三歎。就文為二：第一、舉大智釋深境。釋所以功德無邊者，良由有般若大智故也。住是智慧生四無礙者，具唯一般若也，離一般若為四無礙也。一般若即是自行，四無礙即化他。知諸法實相是義無礙，識諸法名字是法無礙，是名要由語言故次辭無礙，具知三事隨物所樂而說名樂說無礙也。白佛佛恒河沙劫歎者，佛上二品已說阿󳺎相，今開四無礙則更欲歎阿󳺎功德，是故歎佛佛智無盡、阿󳺎功德亦無盡。古解云：須菩提將欲窮其淵底，故詩息其枝末。若曲并功德沙劫未周，今請略其末事。欲問其根下，問深奧，即根本也。

> Third section: First, clarify that the causes of practice are limitless; second, clarify that because the causes of practice are limitless, the fruit of Enlightenment is attained; third, resolve doubts to establish the above principle. The first part has three sections: first, directly praise the limitless practices of Bodhisattvas; second, compare to show superiority; third, explain and confirm the meaning of this superiority. Within the first section, there are three parts: first, based on the previous two chapters, give three kinds of praise; second, explain and confirm these three praises; third, clarify that Bodhisattvas practice in accord with truth, and their merit is limitless. In the first part, Subhuti offers three praises, and then the Buddha explains the reasons. As for the three praises, what is praised here is still the merit explained in the previous two chapters. But these great beings have immeasurable virtue and practice; if one tried to describe all its aspects in detail, one could not finish even in countless eons. Wanting to ask about its profound root and grasp its essential core, Subhuti therefore offers these three general praises. Then the Buddha explains, as in the text. From "Why is this so?" onward is the third part, explaining and confirming the three praises. This passage has two sections: first, cite great wisdom to explain the profound realm. The reason merit is limitless is precisely because one possesses the great wisdom of Prajñā. Abiding in this wisdom gives rise to the four unobstructed understandings—this is entirely due to Prajñā alone. Apart from Prajñā, the four unobstructed understandings are distinguished as follows: Prajñā itself is self-cultivation, while the four unobstructed understandings represent teaching others. Knowing the true nature of all phenomena is the unobstructed understanding of meaning; recognizing the names of all phenomena is the unobstructed understanding of doctrine; this in turn depends on language, hence the unobstructed understanding of eloquence; and fully knowing these three aspects while speaking according to what beings delight in is called the unobstructed understanding of joyful expression. Subhuti says to the Buddha, "praising for eons as numerous as the sands of the Ganges"—the Buddha had already explained the characteristics of Anuttarā Samyaksaṃbodhi in the previous two chapters; now that the four unobstructed understandings have been opened up, he wishes to further praise the merits of Enlightenment. Therefore he praises the Buddha's wisdom as inexhaustible, and the merits of Enlightenment as also inexhaustible. An ancient commentary says: Subhuti, wishing to fathom its depths, sets aside its branches and twigs. If one tried to enumerate all merits exhaustively, even eons of sands would not suffice. Now he requests to set aside the minor details. "Wanting to ask about its root" refers to asking about the profound and mysterious—this is the fundamental matter.

何等深奧事者，第二、舉理深奧釋成三歎。由體深理故生大智，是以深理為根本也。有大知故破上三歎也。佛答三空為深者，凡夫邪見空非深，二乘但空亦非深，此是菩薩不可得空，不見空不見不空，故名深也。無生滅亦三：一、凡夫見諸法常故無生滅，如僧佉二十五諦，雖麤細不同終無所失，即是常故無生滅也；次、二乘無生滅故無生滅，此是但義；三、菩薩被生滅，不著生滅亦不著無生滅也。無深染者，染是煩惱甚深難除，今能除深染故名深也。如法性學之多僻悞故深。涅槃二義：一者、九十六術不能得故深；二者、一切賢聖入者不更退還出故深也。非即色離色者，論云：如陰成就非即非離。此是因果義，今還是因，如是果亦不得即離，色是生滅如無生滅，如無生滅故不可即離，生滅何處有無生滅？故不可離也。亦得雙彈即離兩見也。以方便離色處涅槃者，二乘無方便力離色而住涅槃，菩薩方便力雖離色不著涅槃，以色故不著生死，方便力故不染涅槃。

> What are the profound matters? Second, we explain the three praises by raising the profound principle. Because one realizes the profound principle, great wisdom arises; thus, the profound principle is the foundation. With great wisdom, the three praises above are broken through. The Buddha answers that the three emptinesses are profound: the emptiness of ordinary beings' wrong views is not profound; the emptiness of the two vehicles alone is also not profound. This is the bodhisattva's emptiness of the unattainable—not seeing emptiness, not seeing non-emptiness—therefore it is called profound. There are also three aspects of birthlessness and ceaselessness: First, ordinary beings see all phenomena as permanent, so there is no birth or death—like the twenty-five truths of Sāṃkhya, though coarse and fine differ, nothing is ever lost, being permanent, thus no birth or death. Second, the two vehicles have no birth or death because they have no arising and ceasing; this is the one-sided meaning. Third, the bodhisattva, being subject to birth and death, does not cling to birth and death, nor does he cling to no birth and no death. As for no deep defilement: defilement is affliction, extremely deep and hard to remove; now being able to remove deep defilement, it is called profound. This is like studying the nature of Dharma—many deviations arise, hence it is profound. Nirvana has two meanings: First, the ninety-six heretical paths cannot attain it, hence it is profound. Second, all sages who enter it do not retreat or return from it, hence it is profound. As for "not identical with form, not separate from form," the treatise says: Like the aggregates being accomplished, it is neither identical nor separate. This is the principle of cause and effect. Here it is still the cause; likewise, the fruit cannot be grasped as identical or separate. Form is birth and death, like no birth and no death; because there is no birth and no death, it cannot be identical or separate. Where in birth and death is there no birth and death? Therefore, it cannot be separate. One may also refute both the views of identity and separation. As for "with skillful means, one leaves form and dwells in Nirvana": the two vehicles, lacking skillful means, leave form and abide in Nirvana; the bodhisattva, with skillful means, though leaving form, does not cling to Nirvana. Because of form, he does not cling to birth and death; because of skillful means, he is not defiled by Nirvana.

須菩提！若菩提下，第三、明稱理而行功德無邊，為二：初、明功德無邊；二、格量。今是初。問：二乘無邊法破裂生死尚無果報，今無生忍菩薩云何得大果報？論一解云：二乘煩惱盡無果報，菩薩煩惱未盡故有果報。二云：二乘證實際燒盡功德故無果報，菩薩不證處有生故有果報。三云：少於實理僻故得福少，於實明理不僻故故得福多。菩薩秤實理而行其福彌多，云何言無耶？一日行般若下，第二、格量，為二：初、自分功德格；二、他分功德格。今是初。有人解云：菩薩一日行般若功德，且分為十分之餘殘一分，取此餘殘一分功德，比無方便有所得滿恒河沙大千功德，不及此餘殘一分也。猶亦不咸者，此是不等義也。此解二義非也。今正是自分無所得功德格量，云何及格量有所得、格有所得、格有得，下七種格量復是何物？二者、不咸應不相感，此是義，云何乃云不等？又不咸之意，都不然也。依論釋：一日行般若，功德定有形。取滿十方恒沙大千世界，於一日中，正功德體，猶自不減。喻如取大海水，一時出外，而於大海水，都不覺咸。今亦爾，取一日功德，布施滿十方恒沙大千，而本功德，猶不覺咸也。餘功德，即正功德體也。有分不及者，取滿恒沙世界功德作一分，正功德體復作一分，明恒沙功德比正體功德，百分不及一，乃至譬喻不及一也。總持師云：滿恒沙功德為方便，對正功德體格量，此不成解。此中不論方便功德，如前解，真格量一日行般若功德少多也。復有論師云：取恒沙方便功德作一分，取正體功德少許分作百分，取百分中一分，比方便功德亦不及。至分正體功德作不可說分，取一分，比方便功德亦不及也。此是大悞，如前釋也。

> Subhuti, now I will explain the second part, which is the boundless merit that comes from practicing in accordance with the truth. This has two sections: first, explaining that the merit is boundless; second, comparing its measure. This is the first. One might ask: The two vehicles (those seeking personal liberation) break through the cycle of birth and death, yet still receive no reward. How then does a bodhisattva who has attained the insight of non-arising receive a great reward? There are three interpretations: 1. The two vehicles have exhausted their afflictions and thus receive no reward, while bodhisattvas have not yet exhausted theirs, so they do receive a reward. 2. The two vehicles, by realizing ultimate reality, have burned away all their merit, while bodhisattvas, not resting in that state, continue to generate merit through their compassionate engagement. 3. The two vehicles understand the truth only partially and incorrectly, so their merit is small. Bodhisattvas comprehend the truth fully and correctly, so their merit is great. Since bodhisattvas practice in accord with ultimate reality, their merit is abundant—how could it be said to be nonexistent? Now, the second part, comparing the measure, has two sections: first, comparing with one's own merits; second, comparing with the merits of others. This is the first. Some explain it thus: If a bodhisattva practices the perfection of wisdom for a single day, the merit gained can be divided into ten parts, leaving one part remaining. Even this remaining fraction surpasses the merit of filling the galaxy with offerings made without skillful means and with a grasping mind. Yet even this does not diminish the whole—this is the principle of inequality. But this interpretation is incorrect on two counts. In this section, we are comparing that which is free from grasping with itself. How could we compare it with grasping and non-grasping? And what then are the seven subsequent comparisons about? Furthermore, the idea that diminishing does not occur is a principle of non-interference, so why suggest inequality? The meaning here does not support such an interpretation. According to the treatise: The merit of practicing the perfection of wisdom for one day is substantial and has form. If one were to take this merit and fill the galaxy, or even ten directions of galaxies, the original merit itself would still not be diminished. This is like taking water from the great ocean and pouring it out, yet the ocean does not feel depleted. Likewise, even if one took the merit of a single day and distributed it as offerings across galaxies throughout the ten directions, the original merit would still not be diminished. The remaining merit is the essence of the original merit. When we say “not comparable,” we mean that even if we take the merit of filling the galaxy as one portion, and the essence of the original merit as another, the galaxy-filling merit cannot match even one percent of the original, nor can any analogy express it. The master of the collected teachings says: If we take the galaxy-filling merit as representing skillful means and compare it with the essence of the original merit, this does not form a correct explanation. This section does not discuss skillful means merit, as explained earlier. Rather, it truly measures how great the merit of one day's practice is. Another scholar says: Take the skillful-means merit of filling the galaxy as one portion. Divide the essence of the original merit into a hundred parts, and take one of those hundred parts. Compared to the skillful-means merit, this still falls short. Then divide the essence of the original merit into an incalculable number of parts, and take just one part. Compared to the skillful-means merit, still, it does not surpass it. This is a grave misunderstanding, as explained above.

復次下，第二、舉他分功德格量，即是舉他人有所得功德格。一日行般若功德，自格無所得功德也。此中七復次：初、三舉有所得財施格；二、兩復次，舉有所得法施格；三、有兩復次，舉有所得隨喜迴向格也。

白佛：因緣起法從妄想生者，上來格量稱歎已竟，今第三、釋結成功德勝義。前問，次答。問即是疑，疑云：佛常說有為法虗誑，不能生正見，亦不得菩薩位，云何一日功德猶勝上七種格量耶？佛答：初印其有為實虗誑故，不應有勝功德品，不得入菩薩位也。何以故？是菩薩善學自相空下，此方釋功德勝義，明菩薩功德巧學自相空故，不著虗妄有，亦不著十八空，用十八空破有病也。既有去，無即隨盡，如此淨悟便得入位，故功德無邊也。文云漸得者，從初心即漸學無所得法故，但有得強，無得觀弱，漸得無邊功德至無生現前故，功德具足也。恐但云至無生忍時方有無邊功德，爾前應無，故佛漸說也。白佛：以無量無數下，此問來者，前明格量，次復釋成功德勝義。恐或者間阿󳺎實有無量無數無邊功德，便生著心，今息其命也。無量無邊無數亦只是畢竟空之異名，又非有法，復何著耶？但報云無數名不墮數中，謂有為性、無為性不墮三世中名無量，十方邊不可得名無邊也。頗有色亦無數者，明非但功德數量畢竟空，萬法皆爾也。無量無數無邊義無有異者，恐或有云諸數量等皆空，何得有無數無量無邊異名耶？故今明亦無異名也。次番即云雖無異名，佛以方便力故無異名，為眾生作異名不可說，為眾生故說也。

世尊！不可說義有增減不下，第三、明得菩提義。有二飜：初、翻就不增減義明得；二、翻就無增減增減義得也。須菩提難意：既不增，則善根不增減，菩提何由可得？既其無增減，煩惱何由可離？此就平等門設難也。佛答：以是不增減應應般若，以般若方便秤無般若增咸之理，如無增減而悞，故能成至功果也。初心得、後心得者，第二、就無增減增減義明得菩提也。由語無增減故正觀增，明知淵咸損故行菩提。若無增減則正觀減、顛倒增，如住般若故不住顛倒，住顛倒則不住般若也。今此論菩提無常行，正作善根不增，答難也。雙定二門，雙能兩難，次釋難竟及正難也。為初心得，兩亦亦得也。初心不至後心，結難也。初心亦生即滅，不假至後也。後心時無復初心，後心時無復初心，後心豈在初心中耶？如是心心數法不俱者，此釋難意。有初心時未有後心，有後心時無初後心，故言不俱也。云何善根增益者，正作難也。若爾，則臨至佛時唯有一念善根也，爾前皆已滅無，則善根從初發心終至十地，但有一念，遂無增損，云何得佛道耶？佛答為二：初、就法譬門答；二、重就法說門答。初、開譬答；二、合譬答。由來論師義開此文，證實法不斷惑等，實法火不能燒，假名相續，故有斷、燒等用，今經論無有此意。初云不燒者，實法不燒，不離初者，假名燒也。今問：若爾，可云非初心得，非離初心得，正是後心得，應云不離後心得，云何言非後心耶？又問：此兩不斷句可得不燒，兩不離句此後燒復何得？更問：炷為燒不？今明此是四禪，非即初燒，非離初燒，非離後燒，而因假名燒，四句不得，而因緣假名得也。若初心得，便初心是佛，何須後心？若離初心得，離心何由有復耶？若即後心得，不應因初，若不因初，何由有後？若離後心得者，後心應不得，初心番應得也。炷為燋不者，以眼見因緣炷燋，我亦佛眼見因緣假名得。問：云何因緣假名得道？論云：初炎初心集無量功德，後心則具足，具足故，斷諸煩惱習，故得佛道也。燈總譬菩薩十地也，炷喻無明等煩惱也。初炎初地智，後炎十地智，無明煩惱炷燋盡得佛道也。須菩提是中菩薩具足十地下，第二、重就法說明得菩提義。從初心乃至十地，因緣具足故得佛道也。白佛何等十地者，以十地有二種，故問簡別之。成論地論等師皆云乾慧等三乘共法，歡喜等是獨菩薩法，今明不共此義，須知是般若方便有此共不共義，只此共是不共而不共不共義也。乾慧地者，未得定水，於小乘是四善根前也，於大乘未得順忍三十心前也。性地，小乘四善根，大乘是順忍三十心也。八人，小乘見道十五心，大乘無生忍入菩薩位也。見地，小乘初果，大乘是阿󳺎地也。然無生忍即是阿󳺎地，但八人地據初地入心，見據初地滿心也。薄地，小乘第二果，大乘二地至十地。論云過阿󳺎乃至未成佛，正斷煩惱及習，亦立薄名薄地。離欲地，小乘那含，大乘不配地，但明菩薩離欲得五通也。已辦地，小乘無學，大乘佛地也。此七地不列別名故配菩薩，辟支既列別名故不辨配也。菩薩地二解：一云歡喜等，二即從初發心至法雲，皆名菩薩地也。

須菩提言去，是因緣甚深下，大段第三、釋破疑，明中道行也。所以有此文來者，上明阿󳺎因行及從得果已竟，然此因果之義非二乘所及、非菩薩所知，故聲聞生疑而菩薩起執，故須釋破也。為兩：初、釋聲聞人疑等；小、破非菩薩執。初、須菩提秤歎生疑。秤歎者，明因緣甚深，所謂過去心不滅不住，而能增益得無上道也。生疑者，是事甚深難解，此心為住為滅耶？佛反問云：若心滅，諸法雖無生滅，為眾生故以六情所見生滅問也。須菩提答去，滅已不生，若滅已更生則墮常見也。次問：心生是滅相不？上問過去已滅心，今問現在未滅心也。答云：是滅相已滅者不可更生，今現生者必滅，有為之法先生後滅也。次問：心滅相是滅不者，此問承上生所言，現在心後時必滅，只現在心生即有滅不？此文語密人好不學，即心字為生、滅字為滅，故問云：心滅是不？答云：不也。若心滅有滅者，若一時有二相：一者、心生；二者、後有滅。云何一時中有生滅二法耶？次問：亦如是住不者，汝既言當心時未有滅，畏墮一時之生滅二法，則生應心時無滅便是常住，則生時有滅還墮二相過。佛如是反覆難善吉，辭理既窮不知何答，故云如是住如如住，明此是過故無有生滅，故名常住如如而住也。自上來顯聲聞人不解因緣生滅也。寄善吉破餘聲聞，亦破凡夫生滅心無生滅也。論文難解，今以鑽求作此釋也。脫不諧更俟人當作實證不者，汝說心相同如住去即是實際，可心作實際不？好體應例，而小乘智劣，但得云心同如如，是定義也。實際是涅槃，即滅身心，故不得云心作實際也。次問是為甚深不生，須菩提云心同如，不得作實際，故今問汝既云心同如如深不？須菩提不能遍了如，故云甚深。前明小乘不知心是實際，今復明其不能遍知如也。次問但如是心不？答云不也。心有知、如無知，故心不得是如。次問離如有心？答云不見一切法皆如心，云何獨離如耶？心與如既不得即離，就如中自有見如不？答云不也。如中無物相見也。能如是行為行深般若不者，明菩薩不住如中而能行菩薩道，故佛問如是行深般若不？須菩提自觀小乘智淺、大乘法深，故答佛菩薩如是得行，是行深般若也。後當作實際已來，明小乘人不了無生滅義也。故知因緣生滅，皆是阿󳺎所了，絕二乘境也。古解不同，今更列之。有人云：心生是滅相不者，問有滅相不也。心體是無常，故答云有滅相也。是心滅有滅者，既有滅相，頗實滅不？答以體即虗乎，故答云不也。如是住不，既無生滅，如是住不？答以體同於如，故云如如住也。當作實際證不者，問有證果不？答以心體同如，故云不也。但如是心不者，遣彼同如之心也。如見不者，既遣於心，今又遣如也。上來過去心不生，現心即滅，又無證果，即是明深奧也。此釋智功，恨乖論未辨得失也。師未依論之時，釋三句是因緣義也。佛有三句，須菩提三答，答中初句與第三句皆不也。答第三句云：心生是滅。求此三句，唯成是非兩句耳。佛問：心滅更生不？答云：不更生。若有生法可滅，云何即滅法可生？則是無生滅義也。不生不滅而說生，則指滅為生，故云心是滅相也。此滅是生滅，滅豈是滅？故第三句云：滅相非也。又一勢釋，上無初心後心，因此更論心生滅義。佛問：滅更生不？答云：滅不更生。答第二云：心是滅相。然此二答相違，前既云滅不更生，亦應今生不復滅，今生既生，前滅亦應更生，好體應例。而不例者，此為破病眾生多著常病，故云滅去不復更生。今明有為之法生而必滅，故云生是滅相，故兩句皆是破常也。第三句既是滅相，不可答云是生滅，故復不可答是滅相，故答云不也。然師望通方無礙因緣，義不可加也。但與論不同，故復示之。須菩提！如是行為何處行？第一義中行。第二、破小菩薩執。有此文來者，須菩提上來辭理屈，此中有未得無生忍菩薩，便云小乘智淺，自謂菩薩道深，故佛破云：菩薩如是行為何處行？答云：如是行無處行。菩薩住如中行，實無所行，何以自高耶？次佛問如是行為何處行，既間破行，便墮斷滅，故明第一義中行何故無行耶？二行不可得者，聞第一義中行便有行相，故明此是無行行也。所行是能行二相耶？亦有所得行為二行，無所得為不二行也。下一一責破有無二見也。不行相者，不著有也。不懷相者，不著無也。

今菩薩離二邊行中，中道菩薩為眾生入三下大段，第二段、明阿󳺎人化行。為三：初、明為眾生起行；二、明為眾生起願；三、願既成即便得果。起行即是成就眾生，明願即是淨佛土，阿󳺎所行不出此二，故明之也。初中二：第一、明此品未明為眾生起三昧三昧行也；二、夢行品初論辨此義也。為眾生入三明昧者，菩薩既得悟亦令物同悟。又上明菩薩不在有無中行，今欲入空三昧者，此是為物故同空也，菩薩所得未始空有也。此中先明無作，次空，次無相。去六道皆以願故，受生三塗則臨終起愛，三善道亦然，皆起愛願生，故菩薩先破其愛願，令不生六道脫生老病死苦也。愛願何由斷？須我空故說空行，雖不見我猶見男女萬相，次無也。