Dharma · AI Companion

乾慧地

śuṣka-vidarśanā-bhūmi

有观慧而禅定滋润未足之地AI-generated

Type AttainmentDifficulty AdvancedTruth-level span II · emptinessInitial AI estimate · evolves with use

A Contemporary ReadingAI-generated

I. What This Concept Describes

In the sequence of the "ten stages shared by the three vehicles" (三乘共行十地, *tryayāna-sādhāraṇa-daśabhūmi*) set forth in the *Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra* (《大智度論》, "Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom"), the stage of dry wisdom (乾慧地, *śuṣka-vidarśanā-bhūmi*) is the very first stage. Its name itself contains a highly specific spiritual diagnosis—it comprises two key characters: one is "wisdom" (慧, *vidarśanā* / *prajñā*), and the other is "dry" (乾, *śuṣka*).

**The so-called "wisdom" does not mean emptiness or total absence; rather, it indicates that genuine contemplative wisdom (觀慧, *vidarśanā*) is already present.** This contemplative wisdom specifically manifests as: the ability to observe and distinguish wholesome dharmas (善法, *kuśala-dharma*) from unwholesome ones (不善法, *akuśala-dharma*); the ability to cultivate wholesome dharmas and abandon unwholesome ones; and the ability to practice various contemplations—such as the samādhi of recollecting the Buddha (觀佛三昧, *buddhānusmṛti-samādhi*), the contemplation of impurity (不淨觀, *aśubha-bhāvanā*), loving-kindness and compassion (慈悲, *maitrī-karuṇā*), and impermanence (無常, *anitya*). In other words, a practitioner who reaches this stage is no longer a confused beginner, but possesses considerable clarity of discernment and the capacity to practice wholesome deeds.

**The word "dry" means that this wisdom has not yet been moistened by the "water of meditative concentration" (禪定水, *dhyāna-jala*).** The "water of meditative concentration" is a substantive technical term in the treatise—it refers to the concentration power (*samādhi*) that allows contemplative wisdom to mature into attainment of the Way (得道, *mārga-pratilābha*). By way of analogy: a seed already possesses all internal conditions required for germination (this is wisdom), but it remains in arid soil without being soaked in water; thus, it still cannot truly sprout or bear fruit (this is "not attaining the Way"). Therefore, the four characters of the "stage of dry wisdom" precisely describe an intermediate state of "wisdom already present, concentration power not yet complete"—one must neither underestimate it (since wisdom is indeed already present) nor overestimate it (since it has not yet received the water).

The treatise further divides the stage of dry wisdom into two types of practitioners for explanation—"The stage of dry wisdom has two types: first, śrāvakas (聲聞, 'hearers'); second, bodhisattvas (菩薩, 'enlightened beings')." The internal contents for these two types of practitioners are not identical:

- With respect to the śrāvaka, the practitioner focuses single-mindedly on nirvāṇa (涅槃, "extinction"), strives diligently with vigor, purifies the mind through moral discipline (持戒, *śīla*), and becomes capable of receiving the Way; their contemplative practice includes the samādhi of recollecting the Buddha, the contemplation of impurity, as well as contemplations on compassion and impermanence, distinguishing and cultivating all wholesome dharmas while abandoning all unwholesome ones. Although this state already possesses wisdom, because it lacks the water of meditative concentration, it cannot attain the Way; hence, it belongs to the stage of dry wisdom.

- With respect to the bodhisattva, the scope of the stage of dry wisdom is defined as spanning "from the initial aspiration up to the point before attaining conformity forbearance" (初發心乃至未得順忍). From the initial generation of the mind for awakening (初發心, *prathamacittotpāda*), a bodhisattva cultivates all wholesome deeds; yet as long as they have not yet attained "conformity forbearance" (順忍, *anulomikā-dharmakṣānti*)—an experiential capacity that accords with the forbearance of the non-arising of dharmas (無生法忍, *anutpattika-dharmakṣānti*)—they remain within this stage.

**By contrasting it with the subsequent stage, the "nature stage" (性地, *prakṛti-bhūmi*)**, the boundary of the stage of dry wisdom becomes even clearer: upon reaching the nature stage, the bodhisattva has already attained conformity forbearance, cherishes the real mark of all dharmas (諸法實相, *dharmatā*) without giving rise to wrong views, and has obtained the water of meditative concentration. Therefore, "lacking conformity forbearance and lacking the water of meditative concentration" is the hallmark of the stage of dry wisdom; "having attained conformity forbearance and having obtained the water of meditative concentration" is the mark of entering the nature stage. The element of the water of meditative concentration both informs the naming of "dry wisdom" and serves as the crucial watershed between these two consecutive stages.

Within the complete sequence, the stage of dry wisdom is not an isolated segment, but the starting point of what the *Śāstra* describes as "all ten stages assisting in the completion of the unsurpassed path" (無上道, *anuttara-mārga*). Using the analogy of a lamp's flame, the treatise links the "wisdom corresponding to the first stage" with the wisdoms corresponding to subsequent stages up to the diamond-like samādhi (金剛三昧, *vajropama-samādhi*) into a continuous chain of spiritual fire. Practicing the six perfections (六波羅蜜, *ṣaṭ-pāramitā*) and relying on the power of expedient means (方便力, *upāya-kauśalya*), the bodhisattva "surpasses the stage of dry wisdom, advances through the bodhisattva stages, and abides in the buddha stage" (佛地, *buddha-bhūmi*), the buddha stage being the tenth stage. This statement places the stage of dry wisdom at the starting line of the bodhisattva **setting out upon the Great Vehicle (大乘, *mahāyāna*) and sequentially transcending each stage**.

Finally, a comparison of merit in the treatise is worth mentioning: even if one supposes that all sentient beings in the trichiliocosm abide in the stage of dry wisdom, generating immeasurable merit, it still cannot equal that of a single bodhisattva who has newly generated the mind of awakening. The treatise does not use this comparison to redefine the stage of dry wisdom itself, but rather to highlight the supreme merit of a beginner bodhisattva, while allowing listeners to understand that although the stage of dry wisdom is the head of the ten stages, its level of merit still shows a fundamental gap when compared with the power of the vow made upon first generating the bodhi mind.


II. Auditing in Daily Life

The stage of dry wisdom is a highly precise description of a spiritual state. When mapped against contemporary life, several points correspond particularly well. To avoid common mapping errors, I will walk through them item by item according to the classical definitions.

Scenario 1: The person who has read extensive Buddhist literature

This is a very typical contemporary condition. A white-collar professional listens to podcasts explaining the *Vajracchedikā Sūtra* (*Diamond Sūtra*) and the *Hṛdaya Sūtra* (*Heart Sūtra*) during their commute, and reads books like *What Makes You Not a Buddhist* and *Questions and Answers on Basic Buddhism*. They can clearly articulate "all conditioned things are impermanent, all dharmas are without self," discuss dependent origination and emptiness over dinner, and distinguish between "impermanence" and "annihilationism"—this is precisely the contemplative wisdom aspect of "being able to distinguish and cultivate wholesome dharmas" within the stage of dry wisdom.

However, if they have never actually sat in meditation continuously for more than ten minutes, or if after sitting for five minutes they begin calculating work tasks, scrolling through their phone, or replying to messages, then their "contemplative wisdom" remains in a condition of having seeds without water—able to speak, distinguish, and understand, but the mind has never been truly soaked in meditative concentration. What the treatise describes as "possessing wisdom, yet not obtaining the water of meditative concentration" is an exact portrayal of this state. Note: This is not a criticism that they "lack wisdom," but rather that their wisdom remains "dry."

Scenario 2: The person who long frequents hospitals, social work, and charitable activities

Another friend has worked in an NGO for many years, maintaining long-term contact with patients, elderly people living alone, and families in distress. They possess deep compassion, perceive the suffering of sentient beings, and generate sincere pity, advising everyone they meet to "let go of attachments." Having read parts of the *Bodhicaryāvatāra*, they can recite "I accept all loss and failure," yet simultaneously discover: their own mind is actually often restless, rushed, and spinning around affairs, unable to quiet down at all.

This is in fact a modern mapping of the bodhisattva side of the stage of dry wisdom—already possessing contemplative wisdom and the cultivation of wholesome dharmas (actively applying contemplations of compassion and impermanence), yet lacking conformity forbearance and the water of meditative concentration. Note: Classical texts do not claim they lack the bodhisattva lineage (*gotra*); the bodhisattva at the stage of dry wisdom in the treatise spans precisely the entire interval from initial aspiration up to prior to obtaining conformity forbearance.

Scenario 3: The person who has attended meditation retreats

A friend has attended several Vipassanā retreats or intensive Chan/Zen retreats, and upon returning remarks: "While sitting, I can observe thoughts arising and passing away and bodily sensations changing, but as soon as I return to daily life, that clear state immediately dissipates." This, too, may be a true reflection of the stage of dry wisdom: contemplative wisdom was cultivated during intensive retreat practice, but the water of meditative concentration (a sustained, stable concentration power capable of reflective self-observation) has not yet been established. Thus, the capacity for observation they gained cannot endure long in daily life.

Scenario 4: The person with a psychology background

A person trained for years in psychology, particularly those educated in Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) or Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), can skillfully employ techniques of "observing thoughts without identifying with them" and use metacognition to examine their own emotions. This sounds remarkably like contemplative wisdom—yet please note, the training environment for this capability is not the same thing as the Buddhist "water of meditative concentration." It can be viewed as a similar training in a certain sense, but compared to the water of meditative concentration described in the treatise as the basis for attaining the Way, gaps remain in terms of depth and purpose. We will expand on this in Section III.

Scenario 5: The recipient of religious experiences

Someone might have experienced an intense sense of "emptiness" or profound "tranquility" during a meditation session or at a special moment, mistakenly believing this to be enlightenment. However, the *Śāstra* states clearly that the stage of dry wisdom is a state possessing wisdom yet without attaining the Way; it is only the nature stage that has attained conformity forbearance and obtained the water of meditative concentration. Any experience that misleads a practitioner into believing they have already "attained the Way" or reached "enlightenment," when in fact they do not yet truly possess both concentration and wisdom, can still be subsumed under the diagnostic scope of the stage of dry wisdom.

— Walking through this up to here, the places most prone to mapping errors are: First, reading "dry wisdom" as "lacking wisdom," missing the true meaning of the stage of dry wisdom (the treatise explicitly states it is not an absence of wisdom, but having wisdom without having attained concentration); second, reading the "water of meditative concentration" as merely "knowing how to sit in meditation," ignoring that it is the specific power of concentration that allows contemplative wisdom to mature into attaining the Way; third, equating the "stage of dry wisdom" with the "stage of the ordinary person" (凡夫, *pṛthagjana*), whereas the treatise makes clear that this is a stage of spiritual practice characterized by clear contemplative wisdom and the ability to cultivate wholesome dharmas, not an ignorant ordinary state.


III. Why Contemporary People Need It

Practitioners in our era face a very peculiar predicament: the accessibility of contemplative wisdom is unprecedentedly high, whereas obtaining the water of meditative concentration is unprecedentedly difficult.

On the one hand, books, podcasts, documentaries, online courses, temple social media accounts... materials regarding Buddhist doctrines are vast as the sea. The training of "distinguishing good from evil and cultivating wholesome dharmas" is immensely satisfied at the cognitive level. Many people can speak on the *Heart Sūtra*, quote Nāgārjuna, and articulate the "three natures" (三自性, *trisvabhāva*) of Yogācāra—this is the contemporary manifestation of abundant contemplative wisdom at the stage of dry wisdom.

On the other hand, meditation training aimed at settling the mind is constrained by an extremely fragmented pace of life. Short videos during commutes, instant messages in the office, family chores upon returning home, and endless information streams before sleep. Allowing a single thought to settle upon a single object for more than thirty seconds has become a luxury for many. This means that the water of meditative concentration—the element that nourishes wisdom—is scarce for most contemporary people.

Therefore, the value of the concept of the "stage of dry wisdom" for contemporary individuals lies in at least three dimensions:

First, it provides a clear self-orientation. When you discover that you can understand, recite, and discuss, yet still feel that spiritual practice "lacks leverage" or that "after reading all the books, one still cannot live this life well," you need not succumb to self-doubt—you may simply be in a genuine stage of practice that possesses contemplative wisdom while lacking the water of meditative concentration. The stage of dry wisdom is not a position of failure; it is the starting point of the ten stages shared by the three vehicles, a recognized stage of practice with real substance affirmed by scripture.

Second, it reminds us where the bottleneck of practice lies. Many people spend their effort on continually increasing contemplative wisdom—reading more books, listening to more lectures, and joining more discussions. Yet the diagnosis in the treatise points out with precision: what is missing is not wisdom, but water. The true next step is not to learn a bit more, but to allow the mind to genuinely settle, letting the water of concentration soak the existing wisdom. This echoes findings in contemporary mindfulness research—simply increasing "knowledge" at the cognitive level offers limited help for emotional regulation; what can alter brain function is often sustained, regular attentional training (of course, as mentioned above, this cannot be simply equated with the "water of meditative concentration" described in the treatise in terms of level, purpose, and mechanism).

Third, it protects us from two delusions. One is "I already understand, so my practice is mostly complete"—this is misreading the "dryness" of contemplative wisdom as having already attained the Way; the other is "I haven't even figured out these principles yet, so I am not practicing at all"—this is misreading the stage of dry wisdom as being an ordinary person. The naming of the stage of dry wisdom itself simultaneously rejects both delusions: it acknowledges that you have wisdom, while also acknowledging that your wisdom has not yet been moistened by water.

— Of course, it must be candidly pointed out: the brain science and psychological research mentioned above merely share similarities with certain phenomena in Buddhist practice, and do not constitute verification of the Buddhist concept of the "water of meditative concentration." As the provision for completing the unsurpassed path, the connotation of the water of meditative concentration far exceeds "attentional training" as defined by contemporary psychology. This must be kept in mind; one must not mistake analogy for identity.


IV. Common Misreadings and Clarifications

Misreading 1: "Dry wisdom" means "lacking wisdom"—Incorrect.

This is the most common and fatal misreading. The word "dry" describes the state of wisdom—lacking the moistening of the water of meditative concentration; it does not describe the presence or absence of wisdom. The treatise explicitly states, "there is wisdom, yet the water of meditative concentration is not obtained, hence it is named the stage of dry wisdom," and specifically adduces as evidence the śrāvaka practitioner's contemplations such as the samādhi of recollecting the Buddha, impurity, compassion, and impermanence. If dry wisdom meant an absence of wisdom, then the place of these contemplative practices would be empty. The stage of dry wisdom is a stage of study and practice possessing genuine contemplative wisdom; it is the starting point of the ten stages, not an empty zero position.

Misreading 2: Equating the "water of meditative concentration" with "knowing how to sit cross-legged in meditation"—Incorrect.

Contemporary people easily narrow "meditative concentration" down to a "sitting posture." The water of meditative concentration described in the treatise is that specific concentration power capable of enabling contemplative wisdom to mature into attaining the Way; it is the criterion for transitioning from the stage of dry wisdom into the nature stage. This is a qualitative designation, not a quantitative description. By analogy: sanding with sandpaper is called "grinding," but compared to grinding wheel machining, its transformation of a workpiece's shape is entirely different. Likewise, being able to sit motionless is a rudimentary "tranquility," whereas the concentration power capable of completing the attainment of the Way (the water of meditative concentration) possesses its own specific depth and inner content. External physical stillness does not necessarily equal the internal realization of the water of meditative concentration.

Misreading 3: Believing the stage of dry wisdom belongs exclusively to a single type of practitioner—Incorrect.

The stage of dry wisdom is neither exclusive to bodhisattvas nor exclusive to śrāvakas. The treatise clearly states, "The stage of dry wisdom has two types: first, śrāvakas; second, bodhisattvas." This is the first stage of the ten stages shared by the three vehicles; both śrāvakas and bodhisattvas traverse this stage, differing only in the content and goal of their practice. Restricting the stage of dry wisdom to a single category of practitioner strips it of its status as a shared teaching (共法, *sādhāraṇa-dharma*).

Misreading 4: Assuming that "surpassing the stage of dry wisdom" implies a rejection of it—Incorrect.

In the phrase "surpassing the stage of dry wisdom, advancing through the bodhisattva stages, and abiding in the buddha stage," "surpass" (*guò*) denotes sequential transcendence, not abandonment. A bodhisattva cannot skip the stage of dry wisdom to jump directly into the buddha stage; they must take the stage of dry wisdom as the starting point and sequentially traverse the ten stages. This corresponds completely to the "analogy of the lamp flame"—the burning of the flame from the initial flame to the final flame corresponding to the diamond-like samādhi is continuous; one cannot skip the initial flame.

Misreading 5: Thinking the stage of dry wisdom is a position so low that it is not worth abiding in—Incorrect.

The treatise's comparison of merit was cited earlier: even if all sentient beings in the trichiliocosm abide in the stage of dry wisdom, their merit is exceedingly vast and measureless. This in itself is an affirmation of the abundance of merit in the stage of dry wisdom. Yet the treatise immediately adds that the total merit of all these dry wisdom sentient beings still falls short of a single bodhisattva who has newly generated the mind of awakening—this is not a denial of the merit of the stage of dry wisdom, but a manifestation of the unique supreme excellence of the power of the vow made upon first generating the bodhi mind. As the head of the ten stages and a recognized stage of practice explicitly affirmed by scripture, the stage of dry wisdom deserves to be walked upon earnestly, abided in, and then advanced beyond.

Misreading 6: Believing that the stage of dry wisdom concerns only personal liberation—Incorrect.

Whether in the contemplations of compassion and impurity within śrāvaka practice, or in the connotation of the "initial generation of the mind" within bodhisattva practice, the stage of dry wisdom itself contains contemplations and vows directed toward sentient beings. Reading it as a private position of "working on oneself while disregarding others" is the result of later narrowing, not the original intent of the treatise.


Finally, looking at all of this together: the stage of dry wisdom is not an optional transition; it is the starting point of the ten stages shared by the three vehicles, a specific spiritual stage where contemplative wisdom is already present but the water of meditative concentration is not yet obtained, and a common foundation that both śrāvakas and bodhisattvas must undergo. It tells us that wisdom is not the entirety of practice, nor is the water of meditative concentration an optional ornament—neither can be omitted. Without water, no matter how transparent wisdom is, it remains dry; without wisdom, no matter how clear the water is, there is nothing to moisten.

For contemporary people, acknowledging that one is at the position of the "stage of dry wisdom" is neither self-deprecation nor self-conceit, but an honest self-diagnosis—and then, carrying this diagnosis forward, continuing to cultivate the water of meditative concentration so that existing contemplative wisdom may truly be moistened and accomplished. This is precisely the most down-to-earth reminder left for every practitioner by the *Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra* within the three characters of the "stage of dry wisdom."

Canonical EntryAI-generated

一、定义与核心要义

乾慧地,是《大智度论》所说三乘共行十地中的第一地。所谓“乾慧”,并不是全无智慧,而是行者已经能够观察、分别并修集善法,却尚未获得滋润、助成此慧的“禅定水”,因此仍不能得道。论中直接以“有智慧,不得禅定水”说明其名义:“慧”表示已有观慧,“乾”则表示此慧尚未受到禅定之水的滋润。

《大智度论》在解释诸地如何助成无上道时,以“乾慧地等”统摄十地次第,并将乾慧地列在首位。菩萨自初发心以来修行般若波罗蜜,逐步具足由初地至第十地的功德;诸地并非彼此孤立,而是共同佐助成就阿耨多罗三藐三菩提。论中以灯焰为喻,将“初地相应智慧”与其后诸地乃至金刚三昧相应智慧连成持续的修道历程,显示乾慧地虽是起始阶位,也属于趋向无上道的完整次第。

二、主要阐述

《大智度论》明确说乾慧地“有二种:一者、声闻,二者、菩萨”,分别从声闻行与菩萨行说明此地,不把它限定为单一乘类的阶位。

就声闻而言,行者专为涅槃而勤行精进,以持戒令心清净,使自身堪任受道。其所修观行包括观佛三昧、不净观,以及慈悲、无常等观;又能分别、修集各种善法,舍弃不善法。由这些实践可知,住乾慧地者已经具有辨别善恶、选择修舍并作诸观行的智慧。不过,此时尚未得到禅定水,已有的智慧不能在禅定资助下成就得道,所以仍名乾慧地。论义的重点在“慧已有而定未具”,而不在将此地解释为无慧或不修善法。

就菩萨而言,论中以“初发心乃至未得顺忍”标示乾慧地的范围。菩萨从初发心起修诸善行,但在尚未获得顺忍以前,皆可摄于这一阶段。其后的性地,则被说明为菩萨已得顺忍,爱着诸法实相而不生邪见,并且已经得到禅定水。因此,“未得顺忍”与“不得禅定水”是乾慧地的特征;“已得顺忍”与“得禅定水”则成为进入性地的重要界标。

在“大乘发趣”的论述中,菩萨修行六波罗蜜,凭方便力“过乾慧地,乃至菩萨地,住于佛地”。佛地为第十地;能够依此次第行于十地,即名发趣大乘。这里的“过乾慧地”不是否定此地,而是把它作为菩萨逐层超越诸地、最终安住佛地的起点。

论中另以福德比较显示乾慧地在次第中的位置:即使假设三千大千世界的一切众生皆住乾慧地,其福德甚多无量,仍不及初发意菩萨。下文继而列举性地、八人地、见地、薄地、离欲地、已办地与辟支佛地,逐层作比较。这一段没有重新解释乾慧地的内涵,而是将它列为十地福德比较的首项,并借众多乾慧地众生之福德仍不及初发意菩萨,显明初发意菩萨的福德殊胜。

三、不同部类与译本的表述差异

现有材料仅涉及释经论部《大智度论》(《大智度論》),没有提供其他部类经典或同经异译本的对应文字,因而不能据此列举诸如异译、异名或“五阴/五蕴”一类的用词分歧。就本论本身而言,正式用语始终是“乾慧地”,其释名也直接采用“不得禅定水”的说法;记录此概念时应保留原词,不另改名称。

本论内部则有表述角度的分别:解释声闻时,着重持戒清净、堪任受道以及观佛三昧、不净、慈悲、无常等观;解释菩萨时,着重从初发心到未得顺忍的范围,并以性地的“已得顺忍”及“得禅定水”与之相对。两者同属乾慧地,却依各自行门分别陈述。

四、与相关概念的关系

乾慧地与性地前后相接。对菩萨而言,乾慧地止于未得顺忍、未得禅定水;性地则已得顺忍、得禅定水,且面对诸法实相而不生邪见。禅定水由此既参与“乾慧”之释名,也是两地差别的重要标志。

乾慧地又与般若波罗蜜、六波罗蜜及方便力相连。菩萨自初发心修般若波罗蜜,由各地相应智慧递进;又行六波罗蜜,凭方便力超越乾慧地等诸地,直至佛地。因此,它既是共十地的首地,也是菩萨发趣大乘过程中最先经过的阶位。

在十地次第中,乾慧地之后依次涉及性地、八人地、见地、薄地、离欲地、已办地、辟支佛地、菩萨地与佛地。福德比较虽列举其中多地,却主要借这些阶位显明初发意菩萨福德,并未改变乾慧地“已有智慧而未得禅定水”的基本含义。

五、代表性原文引用

“乾慧地有二种:一者、声闻,二者、菩萨。”此句表明本论以声闻与菩萨两种行者分别解释乾慧地。

“有智慧,不得禅定水,故名乾慧地。”此句是本论对名称核心义理的直接说明。

菩萨方面以“初发心乃至未得顺忍”界定其范围;进入性地后,则已得顺忍,并已得到禅定水。

“过乾慧地,乃至菩萨地,住于佛地。”此句将乾慧地置于菩萨依次行十地、发趣大乘的起点。

By SutraAI-generated

大智度論T1509 · 釋經論部

《大智度論》中「乾慧地」一詞出現於兩個脈絡,分別從修行階位之超越與福德之比較兩面加以論述。

一、作為菩薩所超越之階位。論中敘佛更說第十地相時,謂「菩薩行六波羅蜜,以方便力故,過乾慧地,乃至菩薩地,住於佛地」,並明言「佛地,即是第十地」;菩薩能如是行十地,是名「發趣大乘」。此處乾慧地被置於菩薩修行歷程之最前端,為菩薩以六波羅蜜與方便力所「過」(超越)的諸地之一,其後依次經歷性地等諸地,終至菩薩地、佛地。論中用詞為「過乾慧地」,強調菩薩不停駐於此,而是以方便力徑直超越。

二、作為福德比較之基準。論中佛問須菩提:若三千大千世界中眾生「皆住乾慧地」,其福多否?須菩提答「甚多無量」,佛隨即指出此福「不如初發意菩薩,百倍、千倍、巨億萬倍,乃至算數譬喻所不能及」。此處以「住乾慧地」為一組眾生共住之階位,與初發意菩薩之福德作懸殊對比,凸顯大乘發心之殊勝遠超二乘賢聖所證。緊接其後,佛將比較範圍擴大至「性地、八人地、見地、薄地、離欲地、已辦地、辟支佛地」,謂此一切福德合計仍不及初發意菩薩。由此可見,在《大智度論》所列舉的這組階位序列中,乾慧地居於最前,其後為性地、八人地、見地、薄地、離欲地、已辦地、辟支佛地,皆屬聲聞、辟支佛所行之位,整體低於菩薩之初發意。

三、術語形式。本論一律使用「乾慧地」三字,未見異寫;動詞搭配有二:「過乾慧地」表超越,「住乾慧地」表安住於該位。論中將此組階位統攝於「十地」框架之下,以「發趣大乘」為菩薩行十地之總名,而乾慧地等則為其中被超越之低階,非菩薩所住之歸宿。

Related