| bcom ldan ’das kyis bka’ stsal pa | rab ’byor ’di ji snyam du sems | de bzhin gshegs pas de bzhin gshegs pa dgra bcom pa yang dag par rdzogs pa’i sangs rgyas mar me mdzad las gang blangs pa’i chos de gang yang yod dam |
rab ’byor gyis gsol pa | bcom ldan ’das de ni ma lags te | de bzhin gshegs pas de bzhin gshegs pa dgra bcom pa yang dag par rdzogs pa’i sangs rgyas mar me mdzad las gang blangs pa’i chos de gang yang ma mchis so |
The Lord said, “What do you think, Subhūti? Did the Realized One learn any dharma at all from the Realized, Worthy and Perfectly Awakened One Dīpaṃkara?”
Subhūti said, “No indeed, Lord. There is no dharma at all which the Realized One learned from the Realized, Worthy and Perfectly Awakened One Dīpaṃkara.”
| bcom ldan ’das kyis bka’ stsal pa | rab ’byor byang chub sems dpa’ gang la la zhig ’di skad du bdag gis zhing bkod pa rnams bsgrub par bya’o zhes zer na de ni mi bden par smra ba’o |
| de ci’i phyir zhe na | rab ’byor zhing bkod pa rnams zhing bkod pa rnams zhes bya ba ni bkod pa de dag med par de bzhin gshegs pas gsungs pa’i phyir te | des na zhing bkod pa rnams zhes bya’o |
The Lord said, “Any bodhisattva, Subhūti, who says ‘I will make the dispositions of a field perfect!’ would be telling a lie.
Why is that? Because these so-called ‘dispositions of a field,’ Subhūti, have been preached by the Realized One as dispositionless. That is why they are called ‘dispositions of a field.’
tasmāt tarhi subhūte bodhisatvena evaṃ cittam utpādayitavyaṃ apratiṣṭhitaṃ | na rūpapratiṣṭhitaṃ cittam utpādayitavyaṃ | na śabdagandharasaspraṣṭavyadharmapratiṣṭhitaṃ cittam utpādayitavyam | na kvacitpratiṣṭhitaṃ cittam utpādayitavyam |
tad yathāpi nāma subhūte puruṣo bhavet | yasyaivaṃrūpa ātmabhāvaḥ syāt tad yathāpi nāma sumeruḥ parvatarājā | tat kiṃ manyase subhūte mahān sa ātmabhāvo bhavet |
subhūtir āha | mahān bhagavaṅ mahān sugata | sa ātmabhāvo bhavet | bhagavan | tat kasya hetoḥ | abhāvaḥ sa tathāgatena bhāṣitaḥ | tenocyate ātmabhāva iti | na hi sa bhāvaḥ | tenocyate ātmabhāva iti | ||
| rab ’byor de lta bas na byang chub sems dpa’ sems dpa’ chen pos ’di ltar mi gnas par sems bskyed par bya’o | | ci la’ang mi gnas par sems bskyed par bya’o | | gzugs la’ang mi gnas par sems bskyed par bya’o | | sgra dang | dri dang | ro dang | reg bya dang | chos la’ang mi gnas par sems bskyed par bya’o |
| rab ’byor ’di lta ste dper na skyes bu zhig lus ’di lta bur gyur te | ’di lta ste | ri’i rgyal po ri rab tsam du gyur na rab ’byor ’di ji snyam du sems | lus de che ba yin nam |
rab ’byor gyis gsol pa | bcom ldan ’das lus de ni che ba lags so | | bde bar gshegs pa lus de che lags so | | de ci’i slad du zhe na | de bzhin gshegs pas de dngos po ma mchis par gsungs pa’i slad du ste | des na lus zhes bgyi’o | | de dngos po ma mchis par de bzhin gshegs pas gsungs te | des na lus che zhes bgyi’o |
“For that reason, then, Subhūti, a bodhisattva should conceive an aspiration in such a way that it is unfixed. He should not conceive an aspiration which is fixed in form, he should not conceive an aspiration which is fixed in sounds, smells, tastes, objects of touch, or dharmas, he should not conceive an aspiration which is fixed in anything at all.
Subhūti, it is as if, say, there were a man, whose personal presence was such that it was like, say, Sumeru, the king of all mountains. What do you think, Subhūti? Would his personal presence be substantial?”
Subhūti said, “His personal presence would be substantial, Lord, it would be substantial, Blessed One. Why is that, Lord? The Realized One has described it as an absence. That is why it is called ‘a personal presence.’ For it is not a presence. That is why it is called ‘a personal presence.’”