English
English version: Therefore, this name does not contradict the previous content. The above is Vasubandhu's view, and the four differences mentioned by Asanga have been explained. This fifth one is the absence of arrogance in the attainment of superior practice. If among the eight abodes, there are twelve in the fourth abode of freedom from obstacles, this is the initial freedom from the obstacle of arrogance. It refers to those saints who say, 'I can attain the fruit, I am a Stream-enterer,' etc., hence it is called arrogance. Now, the answer is that if one is in contemplation, there is no arrogance of 'I have attained.' However, the first three fruits may give rise to arrogance when emerging from contemplation, but the fourth fruit (Arhatship) has completely eradicated afflictions, making it impossible for arrogance to arise. Subhuti, 'What do you think? Would a Sakadagamin (Once-returner, the second fruit of Arhatship) have this thought: 'I have attained the fruit of Sakadagamin?' Subhuti replied, 'No, Bhagavan (Blessed One, a title for the Buddha). Why? Sakadagamin is named 'Once-returner,' but in reality, there is no actual returning, hence it is called Sakadagamin.' Subhuti, 'What do you think? Would an Anagamin (Non-returner, the third fruit of Arhatship) have this thought: 'I have attained the fruit of Anagamin?' Subhuti replied, 'No, Bhagavan. Why? Anagamin is named 'Non-returner,' but in reality, there is no actual non-returning, hence it is called Anagamin.' Subhuti, 'What do you think? Would an Arhat (Worthy One, the fourth and final fruit of Arhatship) have this thought: 'I have attained the path of Arhatship?' Subhuti replied, 'No, Bhagavan. Why? In reality, there is no such thing as a dharma called Arhat. Bhagavan, if an Arhat has this thought: 'I have attained the path of Arhatship,' then that would be attachment to the four marks of self, person, sentient being, and life-span.' Commentary: The latter three fruits should all be explained in accordance with the previous explanations. However, the first three fruits should all have 'that would be attachment to self, person,' etc., but because the translator omitted it, it is not there. In the fourth fruit, first the Buddha asks the question, and then Subhuti answers. Among them, first is the direct answer to the question about Arhats, and then Subhuti cites himself as proof, in order to make others believe. The Bhagavan Buddha said, 'I have attained the Arana Samadhi (Samadhi of Non-contention, a state of meditation), and I am the foremost among people, the foremost Arhat free from desire. I do not have this thought: 'I am an Arhat free from desire.' Bhagavan, if I had this thought: 'I have attained the path of Arhatship,' then the Bhagavan would not have said that Subhuti is one who delights in Aranya (Secluded place) practice, because Subhuti actually has no practice, hence it is called Subhuti is one who delights in Aranya practice.' Commentary: This is the second citation of oneself as proof. Saying 'I am the most' --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
一离欲者谓能离烦恼障及定障故也。以是俱解脱故不同慧解脱但离烦恼障也。就引己为证之中有三。初明佛与胜名。次彰不念。后释成前义。若作是念我得阿罗汉等者。是则有我人等执还有烦恼不能无诤。世尊即不说我为无诤行也。以有诤故世尊说。即知我无不念得无诤行也。 佛告须菩提“于意云何如来昔在然灯佛所于法”有所得不。 述曰。依世亲释此破第二疑也。于中初问次答。言然灯者即谓定光。谓释迦佛昔为菩萨之时。七地将满当尔摩纳仙人。闻定光佛欲来入城。遂从一女人买华将以散佛又表己之深敬。布发掩泥当。尔佛为说法即入八地。第三僧祇初也。其卖华女人闻言供佛遂不取钱。便共同愿。因此而来恒为夫妇作善知识即耶输也。谓外有疑曰。上言圣人以无为差别故无说无取。何故释迦于燃灯所而取法。定光复为说耶。今为破此疑故以为问也。言有所得者谓分别心妄所执法也。无所得者谓智证真时无彼分别之心所得法也。但言无彼分别心之所得名无所得。不遮智内冥真亦为所得也。此意云。佛于定光所闻法时无于分别所执有所得法。但智内冥真如于所执中都无所得。证智不可说不可取故亦无说无取也。故今问言佛于燃灯佛所智证于法时为有所得不。 世尊如来“在然灯佛所于法实” 现代汉语译本： 一、离欲者，是指能够脱离烦恼障和定障的人。因为他们是俱解脱者，所以不同于慧解脱者，慧解脱者只能脱离烦恼障。在引用自身经历作为证明的部分，有三个要点：首先，阐明佛陀与胜名的关系；其次，彰显不念的境界；最后，解释并成就前面的意义。如果这样想：‘我获得了阿罗汉’等等，这就是还有我人等执着，还有烦恼，不能达到无诤的境界。世尊就不会说我是无诤行者了。因为有诤，所以世尊说，就知道我是没有念头而获得无诤行的。 佛告诉须菩提：‘你的意思如何？如来过去在然灯佛（Dipamkara Buddha）那里，对于法’有所得吗？’ 述曰：依据世亲的解释，这是为了破除第二个疑惑。其中先是提问，然后是回答。所说的然灯，就是指定光佛。意思是说，释迦佛过去作为菩萨的时候，七地将要圆满，当时是尔摩纳仙人。听说定光佛将要来到城里，于是从一个女人那里买花，准备用来散给佛，又表达自己深深的敬意，铺开头发覆盖泥地。当时，佛为他说法，他就进入了八地，这是第三阿僧祇劫的开始。那个卖花的女人听到要供佛，于是没有要钱，便共同发愿。因此而来，恒常作为夫妇，作为善知识，就是耶输陀罗（Yasodhara）。意思是说，外面有人怀疑说：‘上面说圣人因为以无为作为差别，所以无说无取。为什么释迦在燃灯佛那里而取法，定光佛又为他说法呢？’现在为了破除这个疑惑，所以提出这个问题。所说的‘有所得’，是指分别心虚妄执着的法。‘无所得’，是指智慧证悟真如时，没有那些分别心的所得法。只是说没有那些分别心的所得，就叫做‘无所得’，不遮蔽智慧内在冥合真如也作为所得。这个意思是说，佛在定光佛那里听法时，没有对于分别所执着的有所得法。只是智慧内在冥合真如，对于所执着中都没有所得。证悟的智慧不可说不可取，所以也没有说也没有取。所以现在问说，佛在燃灯佛那里智慧证悟法时，为有所得吗？ 世尊说：如来‘在然灯佛（Dipamkara Buddha）那里，对于法’实在没有所得。
English
English version: A 'one who is detached from desires' refers to someone who can be free from the obstacles of afflictions and the obstacles of samadhi. Because they are liberated from both, they are different from those liberated by wisdom alone, who can only be free from the obstacles of afflictions. In the section citing personal experience as proof, there are three points: first, clarifying the relationship between the Buddha and the superior name; second, highlighting the state of non-thought; and third, explaining and completing the preceding meaning. If one thinks, 'I have attained Arhatship,' etc., then this means there are still attachments to self and others, and there are still afflictions, unable to achieve a state of non-contention. The World-Honored One would not say that I am a practitioner of non-contention. Because there is contention, the World-Honored One says, it is known that I attain the practice of non-contention without thought. The Buddha said to Subhuti, 'What do you think? When the Tathagata was with Dipamkara Buddha (Burning Lamp Buddha), did he obtain anything from the Dharma?' Commentary: According to Vasubandhu's interpretation, this is to dispel the second doubt. It begins with a question and then an answer. 'Burning Lamp' refers to Dipamkara Buddha. It means that when Shakyamuni Buddha was a Bodhisattva, about to complete the seventh Bhumi, he was the hermit Irmana. Hearing that Dipamkara Buddha was about to enter the city, he bought flowers from a woman to scatter them for the Buddha, and also expressed his deep respect by spreading his hair to cover the mud. At that time, the Buddha preached the Dharma to him, and he entered the eighth Bhumi, which was the beginning of the third asamkhya kalpa. The woman who sold the flowers, hearing that they were to be offered to the Buddha, did not take the money and made a joint vow. Therefore, they have come to always be husband and wife, as good spiritual friends, which is Yashodhara. It means that there is an external doubt: 'Above it was said that sages have no speech and no taking because they use non-action as a distinction. Why did Shakyamuni take the Dharma from Dipamkara, and why did Dipamkara preach the Dharma to him?' Now, to dispel this doubt, this question is posed. 'Obtaining something' refers to the Dharma that is falsely grasped by the discriminating mind. 'Obtaining nothing' refers to the fact that when wisdom realizes Suchness, there is no Dharma obtained by that discriminating mind. Simply saying that there is no obtaining by that discriminating mind is called 'obtaining nothing,' not obstructing the wisdom's inner merging with Suchness as also being an obtaining. The meaning is that when the Buddha heard the Dharma from Dipamkara Buddha, he did not obtain any Dharma that was grasped by discrimination. Only wisdom internally merges with Suchness, and there is no obtaining in what is grasped. The wisdom of realization cannot be spoken of or taken, so there is neither speaking nor taking. Therefore, the question is now asked, when the Buddha realized the Dharma with Dipamkara Buddha, did he obtain anything? The World-Honored One said, 'When the Tathagata was with Dipamkara Buddha (Burning Lamp Buddha), he truly obtained nothing from the Dharma.' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 无所得。
Chinese
述曰。此第二答可知也。论云不取理实智者。谓不取者不分别之心执取也。理实智者谓以智证实理时。分别取执者都无所得也。世亲释竟。无著者此第五为不离佛出时。故离障住处十二中此第二离少闻障也。谓若行无所得名为多闻。若作有所得是少闻。然佛于定光佛不作分别取执有所得。故是离少闻障也。 须菩提“于意云何菩萨庄严”佛土不。 述曰。依世亲此破第三疑也。谓有疑。曰无为法中既不可取不可说者。何故菩萨取庄严净佛国土。复云何受乐报佛取自法王身。复云何余世间复取是法王身耶。此中有二初破彼疑菩萨取庄严净土。次破疑佛取自法王身。初中有三。初佛问次善现答。后世尊示劝。此初问也。菩萨取庄严佛国土者。谓初地已上菩萨生报净土。随其分量于一一地见佛不同。自身有异既处净土之中。即是取自庄严净佛土。何故前言圣人以无为有其差别无说无取耶。今破此疑者。谓诸菩萨以无分别智内证真理庄严。故于外事形相之中即得七宝庄严。于内证庄严之时无说无取也。若于外事形相之中而言我庄严佛土者。此可为取。菩萨便是住色等境中。既证无相之庄严。何名取净土。故偈云智习唯识通。智习谓修习无分别智。唯识谓智相应净识。通者谓达真理。即真庄严也。 现代汉语译本 无所得。 述曰：这是第二个回答，可以理解。论中说‘不取理实智者’，意思是‘不取’是指不分别的心执取。‘理实智者’是指用智慧证实真理时，分别取执的人都一无所得。世亲的解释完毕。‘无著者’，这是第五个‘不离佛出时’，所以在‘离障住处’十二种中，这是第二个‘离少闻障’。意思是，如果行持‘无所得’，就称为多闻；如果作‘有所得’，就是少闻。然而，佛在定光佛时，不作分别取执‘有所得’，所以是远离‘少闻障’。 须菩提，‘于意云何，菩萨庄严’佛土不？ 述曰：依据世亲的观点，这是为了破除第三个疑惑。有人疑惑说：‘无为法中既然不可取、不可说，为什么菩萨要取庄严清净的佛国土？又为什么佛要受乐报佛的法王身？又为什么其他世间要取这个法王身呢？’这里面有两个部分，首先是破除他们疑惑菩萨取庄严净土，其次是破除疑惑佛取自己的法王身。第一部分又分为三个小部分：首先是佛的提问，其次是善现的回答，最后是世尊的开示劝导。这是第一个提问。菩萨取庄严佛国土，是指初地以上的菩萨生在报得的净土，随着他们证悟的程度，在每一地见到的佛都不同，自身也有差异，既然身处净土之中，就是取了自己庄严的清净佛土。为什么前面说圣人以无为法有其差别，无说无取呢？现在破除这个疑惑，意思是，诸位菩萨以无分别智内证真理来庄严，所以在外在的事物形象之中，就能得到七宝庄严。在内证庄严的时候，是无说无取的。如果在外在的事物形象之中说‘我庄严佛土’，这就可以说是取了。菩萨便是住在色等境界中。既然已经证得无相的庄严，怎么能说是取净土呢？所以偈颂说：‘智习唯识通’，‘智习’是指修习无分别智，‘唯识’是指与智慧相应的清净识，‘通’是指通达真理，这就是真正的庄严。