[Distinguishing the Meaning] This section and the second section have the same wording but different meanings. For those who arouse the unsurpassed bodhi mind, it is still the bodhi mind inherently complete within our own fundamental nature. To arouse means to realize and know. What is realization? It is the realization in which subject and object are both forgotten, without abiding in dharmas—that is all.
After one has realized the Way, there may still be stirring delight. One takes oneself to have attained and realized something, clings to dharmas, and abides in them. If this is not cut off at this point, emotional views give rise to feverish vexation. How can this be called subduing the mind?
The slightest delight can at once stir up the demon of delight, allowing it to enter one’s heart and lungs. You should know that, compared with those who have not practiced, cultivation and realization seem indeed to involve realization and attainment. But what, after all, is that which realizes, and who is it that arouses the mind? The illusory mind is not self; illusory awareness is not self. When there is no self, the subject cannot be established; when there is no subject, the object is naturally empty. Once this is resolved at the root, who is there to realize? Though this does not negate the sentient beings to be liberated, one no longer clings to the mind that liberates them.
Once the mind is empty and quiescent, where can dharmas be found? Moreover, this stirring delight is itself a dharma; it still arises from the notion that something has been realized or attained. If it is swept away through true contemplation with prajñā, there is in truth no dharma that arouses anuttara-samyak-saṃbodhi. What follows places emphasis on the emptiness of dharmas. Its distinctive point is to clarify this essential insight so as to complete its meaning. For if it is not complete, it cannot be called the original intent of Diamond Sūtra prajñā; it is for those who have not yet realized bodhi.
At that time Subhūti addressed the Buddha, saying, “World-Honored One, when good men and good women arouse the mind of anuttara-samyak-saṃbodhi, how should they abide? How should they subdue their minds?” The Buddha told Subhūti, “When good men and good women arouse the mind of anuttara-samyak-saṃbodhi, they should give rise to this thought: ‘I should liberate all sentient beings. Yet, after liberating all sentient beings, there is not a single sentient being who has truly been liberated.’”
“Why is this so? Subhūti, if a bodhisattva has the mark of self, the mark of person, the mark of sentient being, or the mark of life span, then he is not a bodhisattva. Why is this so? Subhūti, in truth there is no dharma by which one arouses the mind of anuttara-samyak-saṃbodhi.”
[Commentary] Thereupon Subhūti again asked, “When good men and good women arouse the unsurpassed bodhi mind, how exactly should they abide, and how should they subdue their minds?” The Buddha said that good men and good women who arouse the unsurpassed bodhi mind should not retain even the mind that arouses it. They should give rise to this thought: “I certainly should liberate all sentient beings, yet there is not a single sentient being who is truly liberated.”
Moreover, although I have indeed aroused the unsurpassed bodhi mind, the mind that arouses it is in truth also unobtainable as any dharma. “I” refers here to the dharma-self involved in arousing the unsurpassed bodhi mind. The preceding section said that, when arousing the mind to liberate sentient beings, one must not cling to the matter itself. If one thinks there are sentient beings to be liberated and a mind to be aroused, then attachment to the personal self still remains. Once the four marks are established, one cannot be called a bodhisattva.
This section says that, when arousing the mind to liberate sentient beings, one should not cling even to such a view. If there still remains a mind that can liberate and a view of those to be liberated, then attachment to dharmas has not been removed. The four marks remain plainly present, and this cannot be called ultimate. At this point, the practitioner has already gained some measure of realization. Stirring delight is also a common human feeling; but to be moved upon seeing delight is itself a dharma, and demons will seize the opportunity to enter.
If one does not use the sword of wisdom to cut through the sword, the result is swords harming one another. Subtle feverish vexations then arise. How can this be called non-abiding, and how can one speak of subduing the mind? To sweep away such subtle defilements of dharmas requires profound prajñā; otherwise, this cannot be done. This section points out the dharma of emptying views of dharmas: in the original face of bodhi, not even the slightest dharma can truly be obtained. Such expressions are merely provisional names. The preceding section spoke of the illness before realization and therefore taught the emptiness of the person. This section speaks of the illness after attainment and therefore teaches the emptiness of dharmas. They are clearly two different matters, although their wording and tone are very similar. If one pays attention to the several occurrences of the particle zhe, the whole passage becomes alive and clear.
