---
title: "Dharma Should Still Be Let Go"
author: "Shi Huijing (釋慧鏡)"
series_short: "S5"
paper_id: "S5-P04"
paper_number: 4
date: "2026-04"
version: "1.0"
license: "CC BY-NC-SA 4.0"
---
# Dharma Should Still Be Let Go

**The Raft Analogy and the Right Use of Paratantra**

*法尚應捨，何況非法——筏喻與依他起的正用*

## Abstract

The Diamond Sūtra §6 raft analogy — "dharma should still be let go, how much more so non-dharma" (法尚應捨，何況非法) — is the most commonly misread passage in the entire sūtra. Popular readings interpret "dharma should be let go" as meaning "Buddhist teachings are unimportant" or even "practice is unnecessary," sliding directly into nihilism. This paper argues that the doctrinal core of the raft analogy is not "abandoning dharma" but the "right use" of paratantra (dependent nature): the raft is paratantra (dependently arisen, genuinely useful); clinging to the raft as a destination becomes parikalpita (the imagined turns the tool into a prison); setting it down after crossing reveals pariniṣpanna (the raft remains in the water, but you have reached the shore). Through the raft analogy's prototype in the Madhyama Āgama's Alagaddūpama Sutta (T0026) — the paired snake-and-raft teaching — this paper traces the analogy's pedagogical design: not "dharma is unimportant" but "how you learn dharma determines its efficacy." Using the Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra's (T0676) "neither superimposing nor diminishing," the Cheng weishi lun's (T1585) āśraya-parāvṛtti mechanism and post-attainment cognition, and the Yogācārabhūmi's (T1579) upāya-kauśalya pāramitā as Yogācāra evidence, the paper establishes the raft analogy's trisvabhāva mapping and practice sequence. Vasubandhu's verse — "not abiding, in accordance, attaining wisdom within dharma, like a person releasing a raft" — confirms the analogy's precise operation: not abandoning dharma itself ("not discarding dharma"), but "non-abiding." Kuiji's gloss — "not grasping dharma departs from existence; not grasping non-dharma departs from non-existence; departing both, one returns to the Middle Way" — positions the raft analogy as the core teaching of Middle Way praxis.

**Keywords:** Diamond Sūtra, raft analogy, dharma should be let go, paratantra, right use, trisvabhāva mapping, āśraya-parāvṛtti, pṛṣṭha-labdha-jñāna, upāya-kauśalya, Middle Way

---

## I. Introduction

### 1.1 The Problem: The Most Dangerously Misread Passage

Of the Diamond Sūtra's thirty-two sections, every one carries the risk of misreading, but the misreading of §6's raft analogy is the most dangerous — because the direction of its misreading is diametrically opposed to the direction of practice.

"Dharma should still be let go, how much more so non-dharma" — eight characters in Chinese that sound as though the Buddha himself is declaring the dharma unimportant. "Even the dharma should be released — let alone things that are not the dharma" — the reading seems plausible and carries an appealing air of liberation. The problem is: that very sense of liberation is precisely the illness the raft analogy was designed to treat.

"No need to practice anymore" is annihilationism — the Diamond Sūtra has never taught this. "Just keep practicing" is eternalism — the Diamond Sūtra never stops here, either. What the raft analogy teaches is a third path: after practice has been completed, do not be bound by the practice itself.

This third path sounds simple. It is extraordinarily difficult. The difficulty lies in the prerequisite — "after completion." Someone who has never crossed the river and speaks of setting down the raft is not liberated. They are drowning.

### 1.2 From P03 to P04: The Inevitable Question After the First Cut

S5-P03 analyzed §5, "all marks are illusory" (凡所有相皆是虛妄) — the Diamond Sūtra's first cut, directed at "marks." Having read P03, readers will naturally ask: "Very well, I understand that marks are illusory — but what about the dharma itself? Is the dharma also illusory?"

§6 answers this question immediately. And its answer is more radical than the reader expects: not merely "the dharma is also dependently arisen" (which only identifies it as paratantra), but "dharma should still be let go" — even correct dharma, once it has served its purpose, must be released.

The Diamond Sūtra's sequencing is not arbitrary. §5 cuts marks, §6 cuts dharma, and §7 immediately presses further: "Has the Tathāgata attained anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi? Has the Tathāgata spoken any dharma?" — if dharma is like a raft, then what exactly has the Tathāgata spoken? Read together, the three sections form a complete pedagogical arc: breaking marks (§5) → breaking dharma (§6) → even "speaking dharma" is empty (§7).

### 1.3 §6's Special Position in the Dual-Layer Structure

S5-P07 revealed the Diamond Sūtra's dual-layer architecture, pivoting at §17: the first half (§1–16) addresses person-emptiness, breaks the four "marks," and counters afflictive obstruction; the second half (§17–32) addresses dharma-emptiness, breaks the four "views," and counters cognitive obstruction.

§6's structural position is remarkable: it sits in the first half, but its content directly anticipates the second half.

The character "dharma" (法) in "dharma should still be let go" marks the first time in the entire sūtra that the dharma itself becomes an object to be "let go." Other passages in the first half cut external marks — self-mark, other-mark, being-mark, life-mark, buddha-lands, physical bodies. §6 suddenly leaps to "dharma" — a word that belongs to the core theme of the second half (§17–32). Kuiji already noted this explicitly in T1700:[^1]

> "No mark of self, others, beings, or life-span" removes self-grasping. "No dharma-mark and no non-dharma-mark" removes dharma-grasping.

§6's "one should not grasp dharma, nor should one grasp non-dharma" corresponds precisely to "removing dharma-grasping." It uses the language of the first half to lay the groundwork for the second half's curriculum.

This paper therefore occupies a unique position in the S5 series: it is the transitional paper from the first half to the second half. P03 was the first half's opening cut (cutting marks); P04 is the first half's farewell — a preview of "cutting even the dharma." Beginning with P05, the papers enter themes that span the entire sūtra or belong specifically to the second half.

---

## II. Scriptural Evidence

### A. Sūtra Sources

#### 2.1 The Complete Context of §6's Raft Analogy

The §6 raft analogy is not an isolated aphorism. It appears within a meticulously structured argument. The Buddha first states "these beings are free from marks of self, others, beings, and life-span" — basic first-half teaching on breaking marks, already familiar to the reader. Then the discourse pivots:[^2]

> No dharma-mark, and no non-dharma-mark. Why? If these beings' minds grasp at marks, they are attached to self, others, beings, and life-span. If they grasp the dharma-mark, they are attached to self, others, beings, and life-span. Why? If they grasp the non-dharma-mark, they are attached to self, others, beings, and life-span. Therefore one should not grasp dharma, nor should one grasp non-dharma. For this reason the Tathāgata always says: "You bhikṣus, know that my teaching of dharma is like a raft analogy — dharma should still be let go, how much more so non-dharma."

The passage's logical structure repays layer-by-layer analysis:

Layer one: "No dharma-mark, and no non-dharma-mark" — not only is there no substantial "dharma," there is no substantial "non-dharma" either. This is a simultaneous negation of the dharma/non-dharma binary.

Layer two: "If they grasp the dharma-mark, they are attached to self, others, beings, and life-span" — grasping dharma-marks produces the same result as grasping self-marks. Note carefully: the text does not say "grasping dharma leads to attachment to dharma," but rather "grasping dharma leads to attachment to self, others, beings, and life-span" — because behind every act of "grasping" lies self-grasping. When you cling to a teaching, you appear to cling to the teaching, but the underlying structure is still "I am clinging to this teaching."

Layer three: "If they grasp the non-dharma-mark, they are attached to self, others, beings, and life-span" — grasping "non-dharma" (the position that negates dharma) equally falls into self-grasping. Negating dharma and clinging to dharma are the same illness — their underlying structure is identical.

Layer four: Therefore "one should not grasp dharma, nor should one grasp non-dharma" — depart from both sides of dharma/non-dharma.

Layer five: In this context, the Buddha introduces the raft analogy — "dharma should still be let go, how much more so non-dharma." The raft analogy does not appear ex nihilo; it is the concluding image for the preceding four layers of argument.

#### 2.2 The §5→§6→§7 Pedagogical Arc

§5 closes with "all marks are illusory; if one sees that marks are not marks, one sees the Tathāgata." Subhūti, having heard this, worries: "Will any beings, hearing these words and phrases, give rise to genuine faith?" The Buddha first reassures confidence:[^3]

> They have already planted good roots under immeasurable millions of buddhas. Hearing these phrases, those who give rise to even a single thought of pure faith — Subhūti! — the Tathāgata fully knows and fully sees that these beings attain such immeasurable merit.

Then the discourse shifts directly into §6's dharma/non-dharma analysis and the raft analogy. §7 immediately follows with a pointed question:[^4]

> Subhūti, what do you think? Has the Tathāgata attained anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi? Has the Tathāgata spoken any dharma?

Subhūti replies: "As I understand the meaning the Buddha has spoken, there is no fixed dharma called anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi, and there is no fixed dharma that the Tathāgata could speak. Why? The dharma spoken by the Tathāgata cannot be grasped, cannot be spoken — it is neither dharma nor non-dharma."

§5→§6→§7 forms a complete pedagogical progression: all marks are illusory (breaking the grasped object) → dharma too is like a raft to be released (breaking the grasping of dharma) → there is no fixed dharma the Tathāgata could speak (even "teaching dharma" itself cannot be solidified). Together, the three sections execute a triple jump from breaking marks to breaking dharma to breaking the act of teaching itself.

#### 2.3 The Madhyama Āgama: The Raft Analogy's Complete Pedagogical Prototype

The Diamond Sūtra's raft analogy is a compressed quotation — "know that my teaching of dharma is like a raft analogy" — with the Buddha's phrase "always says" (常說) indicating this is a long-standing teaching. The prototype is preserved in the Madhyama Āgama's 200th sūtra, the "Alagaddūpama Sutta" (T0026, fascicle 54), corresponding to Pāli MN 22.

In the prototype, the raft analogy does not appear alone. It is paired with the snake analogy to form a complete teaching: the snake analogy comes first, the raft analogy second.[^5]

The snake analogy teaches: someone wants to catch a snake. One who does not understand the method "grasps its midsection with his hand; the snake turns its head back and bites his hands, feet, and other limbs" — improper technique, bitten by the snake. One who understands the method "first presses the snake's head with an iron staff, then grasps its head" — the snake wraps around him but cannot bite.

The snake analogy's lesson is: the correctness of one's method of learning dharma matters more than whether one learns at all. Learning dharma improperly, the dharma itself harms you — like grasping the snake at the waist and being bitten.

Immediately following, the Buddha tells the raft analogy:[^6]

> Suppose a great mountain torrent, deep and wide, with a swift current carrying much debris, with neither boat nor bridge. A person arrives who has business on the far shore and wishes to cross... "Let me gather grass and wood from this bank, bind them into a raft, and ride it across." He gathers grass and wood, binds a raft, rides it across, and arrives safely.

After crossing:

> He thinks: "This raft has been of great benefit. Riding this raft, I have arrived safely from that shore to this shore. Let me now carry it on my right shoulder or bear it on my head as I go."

The Buddha asks: does acting this way actually benefit the raft? Obviously not. The correct course is "to return this raft to the water, or leave it at the bank, and depart."

The Buddha concludes:[^7]

> Just so. I have for a long night taught the raft-analogy dharma, wishing you to abandon it, not wishing you to hold on to it. If you understand my long-night teaching of the raft-analogy dharma, you should let go of dharma — how much more so non-dharma?

Read together, the snake and raft analogies cover the full spectrum of learning risks: the snake analogy addresses how to learn (wrong method = dharma harms you); the raft analogy addresses what to do after learning (right method completed = release the tool). Together they provide the complete curriculum of the relationship between practitioner and practice.

#### 2.4 §21 "One Who Speaks Dharma Has No Dharma to Speak" — The Second Half's Ultimate Self-Negation

§6's "dharma should still be let go" reaches its apex in the second half at §21:[^8]

> Subhūti! Do not say that the Tathāgata has the thought "I shall speak some dharma." Do not think this. Why? If someone says "the Tathāgata has spoken some dharma," they slander the Buddha and cannot understand what I have taught. Subhūti! One who speaks dharma has no dharma to speak — this is called speaking dharma.

§6 says "dharma is like a raft" — dharma is a tool; use it, then set it down. §21 goes further: even the fact that "the Buddha is teaching dharma" is itself a jífēi structure — "one who speaks dharma has no dharma to speak; this is called speaking dharma." If you say the Tathāgata has spoken some dharma, you are not understanding the Buddha — you are slandering him.

From §6 to §21, the raft analogy's logic completes a two-level progression: level one (§6, first half) — dharma is a tool; use it, then release; level two (§21, second half) — even the cognition "there is dharma to use" must itself be subjected to the jífēi structure. S5-P07's framework finds perfect confirmation here: §6 in the first half previews the second half's theme; §21 is §6's upgrade at the level of dharma-emptiness.

#### 2.5 The Semantic Spectrum of "Dharma" in the Diamond Sūtra

What "dharma" does the raft analogy ask us to release? The character 法 in the Diamond Sūtra spans at least ten distinct semantic registers:[^9] the Buddha's teaching (如來所說法), non-dharma (不應取非法), dharma-mark (法相), good dharmas (善法), all dharmas are buddha-dharma (一切法皆是佛法), no dharma to speak (無法可說), no fixed dharma (無有定法), the bodhisattva should abide nowhere regarding dharmas (菩薩於法應無所住), there is truly no dharma (實無有法), and dharma-mark is not dharma-mark and is called dharma-mark (法相即非法相是名法相).

"Dharma" in the Diamond Sūtra is not univocal. It is a prism — rotate the angle and it refracts different light. The "dharma" in the raft analogy does not refer only to "the Buddha's teachings"; it encompasses every cognitive framework you might cling to — including "emptiness" itself. S5-P03 analyzed the spectrum of "marks"; this paper analyzes the spectrum of "dharma." Together they cover the two great objects the entire Diamond Sūtra aims to cut.

### B. Treatise Sources

#### 2.6 Vasubandhu: "Non-Abiding in Accordance" — Before Reaching Shore, Take the Raft; After, Do Not Abide in Dharma

Vasubandhu in the *Jingang bore boluomi jing lun* (T1511) provides the most precise operational definition for the raft analogy. First, he cites a crucial variant of the sūtra passage: "This dharma should be let go — not that dharma itself is discarded" (是法應捨，非捨法故).[^10] The phrase "not discarding dharma itself" is the cornerstone of Vasubandhu's interpretation: dharma should be released, but what is released is not "dharma itself" — it is "abiding in dharma."

Vasubandhu further explains "one should not grasp dharma, nor should one not grasp dharma":[^11]

> "Should not grasp dharma" means one should not grasp dharma as mere sound. "Nor should one not grasp dharma" means grasping in accordance with ultimate truth-wisdom, correctly spoken thus.

"Should not grasp dharma as mere sound" — do not seize the surface level of words. "In accordance with ultimate truth-wisdom, correctly grasp" — grasp through first-meaning wisdom, as things truly are. It is not "do not grasp" but "grasp correctly" — the mode of grasping transforms.

Vasubandhu's verse is the raft analogy's most complete doctrinal compression:[^12]

> Not abiding, in accordance, / Attaining wisdom within dharma, / Like a person releasing a raft — / So too with the meaning within dharma.

And his prose commentary:

> This shows that within sūtras and other dharmas, one attains wisdom without abiding. Having attained wisdom, one releases dharma — like reaching the far shore and releasing the raft. "In accordance" means in accordance with the dharma that leads to that wisdom. That dharma should be taken up — like a person who has not yet reached the far shore taking up the raft.

Vasubandhu's framework is clear: before reaching shore — dharma should be taken up (as a person takes up the raft before reaching the far shore); after reaching shore — having attained wisdom, release dharma (as one releases the raft upon reaching shore); throughout — non-abiding (abide neither in dharma nor in the release of dharma). The core is not "to grasp or not to grasp" but "to abide or not to abide."

#### 2.7 Asaṅga: Five Types of Wrong Grasping and "Because Right Cognition Has Arisen"

Asaṅga in the *Nengduan jingang bore lun* (T1510a/T1510b) approaches the raft analogy from another angle:[^13]

> "Dharma should still be let go" — because right cognition (實想) has arisen. "How much more so non-dharma" — because it does not accord with principle. In brief, the bodhisattva who seeks the verbal dharma-body should not form false cognitions.

"Because right cognition has arisen" — "dharma should be let go" not because dharma is unimportant, but because you have already obtained dharma's effect (right cognition has arisen), and therefore no longer need to clutch the tool. "Because it does not accord with principle" — "non-dharma" should a fortiori not be grasped, since it never accorded with principle in the first place.

Asaṅga further proposes the "five types of wrong grasping" framework:[^14] non-Buddhists' self-notions, Buddhist worldlings' and śrāvakas' dharma-mark turning, overconfident bodhisattvas' non-pure-notion turning (which still constitutes dharma-grasping), mundane shared-notion samādhi, and no-notion samādhi. The raft analogy counters all five — not merely one particular error, but every form of "grasping."

#### 2.8 Kuiji: "Departing Both Existence and Non-Existence, One Returns to the Middle Way"

Kuiji in the *Jingang bore boluomi jing zanshu* (T1700) reads the raft analogy through multiple layers.

On the positioning of dharma-grasping, Kuiji states explicitly in fascicle 2:[^15]

> Conceiving that all dharmas have real self-nature is called dharma-grasping. The Buddha taught the Lesser Vehicle to remove self-grasping. That Prajñā now addresses this again means the deeper necessarily encompasses the shallower — thus its primary function is removing dharma-grasping, while also illuminating person-emptiness.

Prajñā's core function is "primarily removing dharma-grasping" — not merely self-grasping. The raft analogy is the central passage in this dharma-grasping curriculum.

On the Middle Way operation, Kuiji directly summarizes the raft analogy in fascicle 4:[^16]

> "Should not grasp dharma" departs from existence. "Should not grasp non-dharma" departs from non-existence. Having departed both existence and non-existence, one returns to the Middle Way.

Not grasping dharma = departing from existence (not clinging to dharma as substantially real). Not grasping non-dharma = departing from non-existence (not falling into nihilistic denial). Departing both sides — this is the Middle Way. The raft analogy does not teach you to "let go." It teaches you the Middle Way.

Kuiji further offers a subtle analysis of "provisional words revealing meaning":[^17]

> What is called "non-dharma" reveals that the dharma's substance is free from fixed conceptual attribution. Without the words "non-dharma," one could not know this meaning. The same applies throughout. Know that meaning does not reveal itself; it necessarily relies on words. Hence the Vimalakīrti says: "There is no liberation apart from written words."

"Meaning does not reveal itself; it necessarily relies on words" — doctrinal truth does not emerge on its own; it must borrow language. But language is not the truth itself. The raft (language) is necessary — without it you cannot cross the river; but the raft is not the far shore — upon arrival you need not carry it on your back.

Kuiji also addresses innate dharma-grasping:[^18]

> "Those who have not yet removed the subtle grasping" refers to the innate, spontaneously arising forms of the two graspings... the subtle grasping has not been removed and ultimately obstructs the holy path, hence this teaching is presented to eliminate it.

§6's raft analogy addresses not merely acquired dharma-grasping (conceptual attachment) but innate dharma-grasping (spontaneous, so subtle you do not know you have it) — precisely why the raft analogy must appear in the Diamond Sūtra, for innate dharma-grasping is too hidden to be illuminated by anything less than prajñā-level teaching.

In T1700, where Kuiji draws on both Vasubandhu and Asaṅga, he offers a condensed summary:[^19]

> When one is about to realize truth, one necessarily relies on verbal teaching; at the moment of true realization, words are no longer needed — like a raft that, upon reaching shore, has no further use.

About to realize truth — one needs language (the raft). At the moment of realization — language is no longer needed (reaching shore, the raft has no use). The entire process is not "language is useless" but "language's function has a temporal scope."

### C. Yogācāra Evidence

#### 2.9 The Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra: Neither Superimposing nor Diminishing

The raft analogy's two great misreadings — "dharma is unimportant" (diminishing) and "dharma is the answer" (superimposing) — find their most precise doctrinal basis in the Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra.

The sūtra's fascicle 2 uses the sphaṭika (crystal) analogy to establish the three-nature framework: the pure crystal = paratantra, the colors seen on the crystal = parikalpita, taking the crystal to be a gem = superimposition on paratantra.[^20]

The core operational instruction:[^21]

> If bodhisattvas can, upon the paratantra-nature of all dharmas, truly understand the parikalpita-nature, they can truly understand all markless dharmas... Having truly understood markless dharmas, they eliminate all defiled dharmas; having eliminated all defiled dharmas, they realize all pure dharmas.

This passage maps perfectly onto the raft analogy's operation: upon the paratantra (raft), truly understand the parikalpita (do not mistake the raft for the destination), thereby eliminate defilements (release attachment to the raft), and realize purity (reach the far shore). The key is "truly understand" — not negating paratantra, but truly understanding the parikalpita that is superimposed upon it.

The Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra issues a severe warning against diminishing:[^22]

> If they see the paratantra and pariniṣpanna natures as markless, they also repudiate the parikalpita-nature — hence they repudiate all three natures... Because they grasp non-meaning as meaning, they lose wisdom... I say that whoever views all marks as markless and proclaims non-meaning as meaning creates the means for vast karmic obstruction.

"All dharmas decidedly have no self-nature" — this is precisely the doctrinal source of misreading "dharma should be let go" as "nothing needs to be done." The Buddha's verdict is severe: "the means for vast karmic obstruction" — you think you are propagating emptiness, when you are in fact leading people into wrong views.

Superimposition = carrying the raft on your head after crossing (parikalpita).
Diminishing = throwing the raft away in the middle of the river (repudiating all three natures).
Right understanding = using the raft to cross, then setting it down upon arrival (truly understanding paratantra).

The raft analogy teaches the third path.

#### 2.10 The Cheng weishi lun: Āśraya-parāvṛtti — The Raft Remains in the Water, but You Have Reached Shore

The raft analogy's Yogācāra mechanism is āśraya-parāvṛtti (transformation of the basis). The Cheng weishi lun, fascicle 9, provides the core verse:[^23]

> Without attainment, inconceivable, / This is supramundane wisdom. / By abandoning the two kinds of grossness, / One thereby attains the transformation of the basis.

The precise definition of "transformation of the basis":[^24]

> "Basis" means that which serves as support — namely paratantra, which serves as the support for both defiled and pure dharmas. "Defiled" means the illusory parikalpita. "Pure" means the real pariniṣpanna. "Transformation" has two aspects: transformation-abandonment and transformation-attainment. Through repeated cultivation of non-discriminating wisdom, one severs the two obstructions' gross seeds in the root consciousness, thereby able to abandon the parikalpita superimposed upon paratantra, and able to attain the pariniṣpanna within paratantra.

This passage is the raft analogy translated into Yogācāra:

"Basis is paratantra" — the raft is paratantra.
"Abandon the parikalpita superimposed upon paratantra" — what is released is not the raft itself, but the parikalpita upon it (the illusion that the raft is the destination).
"Attain the pariniṣpanna within paratantra" — what is gained is seeing the raft's true nature (pariniṣpanna).

The critical point: paratantra itself is not discarded. Āśraya-parāvṛtti does not destroy paratantra; it transforms the cognitive mode operating upon it. The raft remains in the water — it has not vanished — but you have reached shore. Your relationship with the raft has changed; the raft itself has not.

#### 2.11 Post-Attainment Cognition: After Crossing, Knowing Illusion and Working with It

The Cheng weishi lun, fascicle 8, clarifies the practice sequence:[^25]

> After non-discriminating wisdom has realized tathatā, it is within post-attainment cognition that one can then understand paratantra-natures as being like magical illusions and so forth.

And the verse:[^26]

> Not without having seen tathatā / Can one understand all processes / As being like magical illusions — / Though existent, yet not truly real.

This sequence is essential to the raft analogy: first, fundamental non-discriminating wisdom realizes tathatā (= crossing the river); then post-attainment cognition understands paratantra as illusion-like (= after reaching shore, knowing the raft is illusion-like). The sequence cannot be reversed — one does not first know "everything is like an illusion" and then cross; one must first cross in order to genuinely know the illusion-like nature.

Post-attainment cognition possesses both the perceiving and perceived aspects — it can manifest bodies, lands, and teach dharma to beings.[^27] This is the bodhisattva's raft: the person who has crossed returns, using post-attainment cognition to come back. They know the raft is illusion-like, but they do not deny its function. They do not carry the raft while walking, but neither do they refuse to prepare rafts for those still on this shore.

#### 2.12 The Yogācārabhūmi: Upāya-Kauśalya — Neither Taking Up a Fraction, Nor Discarding a Fraction

The Yogācārabhūmi, fascicle 45, provides the most complete bodhisattva-path operational manual for the raft analogy:[^28]

> This sūtra does not say that all dharmas are completely nonexistent; it says only that the verbally designated self-natures of dharmas are nonexistent... Thus dharmas are not as they appear to be through the force of ordinary beings' habitual verbal designation, nor are all dharmas' ultimate, beyond-verbal self-natures completely nonexistent. Through this skillful means one enters into the principle: all dharmas are neither existent nor nonexistent, like magical illusions and dreams, their nature non-dual.

Then comes the most precise expression of the raft analogy's operation:[^29]

> Such a bodhisattva, regarding the entire dharma-realm, neither takes up a fraction, nor discards a fraction; neither diminishes nor superimposes; loses nothing. If a dharma truly exists, they know it as truly existing. If a dharma truly does not exist, they know it as truly not existing. As they know, so they teach.

"Neither taking up a fraction, nor discarding a fraction" — not taking one bit more, not discarding one bit less. No superimposition, no diminishing. What exists is what exists; what does not is what does not — knowing things as they are, teaching things as they are. This is the bodhisattva's skillful means — not "technique" but "fidelity to things as they are."

The Yogācārabhūmi, fascicle 48, further describes this state as "abiding yet not abiding":[^30]

> Conducting oneself in all worldly activities without defilement... Abiding yet not abiding in worldly conditioned processes; though seeing the merit of quiescent nirvāṇa, likewise not abiding therein.

"Abiding yet not abiding" = the raft analogy's highest form. Abiding in worldly conditioned processes (building rafts and ferrying people) yet not abiding (not regarding the raft as one's achievement). Seeing nirvāṇa's quiescence (knowing the far shore exists) yet likewise not abiding (not settling on the far shore in comfortable inaction).

---

## III. Core Argument

### 3.1 The Raft Analogy's Trisvabhāva Mapping ✅

Based on the above scriptural evidence, this paper's core thesis is as follows: the raft analogy's doctrinal structure can be fully illuminated through the Yogācāra three-nature framework.

**The raft = paratantra.** The raft is dependently arisen — someone needs to cross, there is grass and wood by the riverbank, the person has wisdom and hands, conditions are sufficient, and the raft is constructed. The raft is not self-existent, not eternal, but it is genuinely useful. You cannot, because it is dependently arisen, claim it does not exist — you are standing on it as you cross.

**Clinging to the raft as destination = parikalpita.** After crossing, "carrying it on his right shoulder or bearing it on his head" — the raft transforms from tool to identity marker: "I am someone who owns a raft," "I am someone skilled with rafts." The tool has been reified; function has been solidified into essence. Parikalpita has arisen upon paratantra.

**Using it and setting it down = the revealing of pariniṣpanna.** "Returning this raft to the water, or leaving it at the bank, and departing" — the raft remains in the water or at the bank (paratantra has not been destroyed), but your relationship with the raft has changed. You no longer carry it, nor do you need it — because you have reached the far shore. You see the raft's true nature as it is: a tool, no more and no less. This "seeing as it is" is pariniṣpanna.

This mapping is fully consistent with the Pointing-at-the-Moon mapping established in S5-P01: X (raft) = paratantra, "is not X" (the raft is not the destination) = negation of parikalpita, "is called X" (the raft as it truly is) = pariniṣpanna.

### 3.2 "Dharma Should Be Let Go" Does Not Mean "Dharma Is Unnecessary" — First Cross, Then Release

The prerequisite for "dharma should be let go" is that you have already used dharma to cross the river.

The Āgama prototype states this unambiguously: "This raft has been of great benefit; riding this raft, I have arrived safely" — first confirm the raft's usefulness ("great benefit"), first confirm you have actually crossed ("arrived safely"), and only then discuss releasing it.

Speaking of releasing the raft without having crossed the river has three possible meanings: (1) you do not know there is a river (ignorance); (2) you know there is a river but deny the need to cross (annihilationism); (3) you stand in the middle of the river declaring "the raft is unimportant" (the most dangerous — you are drowning while believing yourself to be practicing).

S5-P07's dual-layer structure provides crucial context here: the first half's (§1–16) entire teaching trains you in how to use the raft. Non-abiding giving is a raft, freedom from the four marks is a raft, seeing things as they are is a raft — all genuinely effective practice tools (the right use of paratantra). The second half (§17–32) teaches: after crossing, do not let the raft become a new attachment (countering cognitive obstruction).

§6 is placed in the first half because it reminds you, while you are still using the raft: the raft you are currently using will eventually need to be set down. Not now — right now you are in the river, and releasing it means drowning. Rather, it informs you in advance that the destination is not the raft — the destination is the far shore.

This is like a physician telling you on the first day of medication: "This medicine is for treating the illness. When the illness is cured, stop the medicine — do not take it for the rest of your life." — not telling you to stop taking the medicine, but telling you not to make taking medicine your life's purpose.

### 3.3 The Precise Negation of "How Much More So Non-Dharma"

"Dharma should still be let go, how much more so non-dharma" — what is "non-dharma"?

First-level reading: "non-dharma" = incorrect teachings, wrong views. Even correct dharma should be released; how much more so incorrect dharma. This reading is valid but superficial.

Second-level reading: "non-dharma" = the negation of dharma. §6's logic runs "if they grasp the dharma-mark... if they grasp the non-dharma-mark" — grasping "dharma" and grasping "non-dharma" are listed as equally erroneous. "Non-dharma" is not some specific bad thing; it is "dharma's" negative face — the position "dharma does not exist" or "dharma is meaningless." Holding this position is as much parikalpita as clinging to dharma.

Kuiji's reading is more precise:[^31]

> The dharma of true reality is itself unobtainable — how much less all dharmas outside of true reality? "Apart from the true reality of all dharmas, everything else is the work of Māra."

The dharma of true reality (the ultimate teaching) is itself unobtainable — not because it is flawed, but because the act of "obtaining" is itself attachment. Everything outside true reality (non-dharma) a fortiori should not be grasped.

Asaṅga's "because it does not accord with principle" is more concise: non-dharma in principle should not be grasped — it is not even a tool, so the question of "releasing" it does not arise. You only need to release tools you have actually used; you do not need to "release" garbage you never picked up.

### 3.4 The "Right Use" vs. "Wrong Use" of Paratantra: Superimposition, Diminishing, and Fidelity

The raft analogy's trisvabhāva mapping reveals three modes of engaging with paratantra:

**Superimposition (samāropa) = clinging to the raft as substantially real.** Taking the tool for the destination, the map for the territory, the finger for the moon. The dharma is a tool (paratantra); you have turned it into an idol (parikalpita). The Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra's superimposition mechanism — "verbal habituation → verbal awakening → verbal dormancy → grasping parikalpita → three defilements → saṃsāra through the six destinies"[^32] — unfolds in the raft analogy as: you begin learning dharma → dharma's language enters your cognition → you gradually equate dharma's language with dharma itself → you cling to "I understand the dharma" → new self-grasping arises → saṃsāra continues.

**Diminishing (apavāda) = denying the raft's existence.** "All dharmas decidedly have no self-nature," therefore "nothing needs to be done." The Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra condemns this as "repudiating all three natures" — you have not merely negated parikalpita (which is correct), but have negated paratantra and pariniṣpanna as well (which is annihilationism). The Buddha's verdict is severe: "creates the means for vast karmic obstruction" — you think you are propagating emptiness, when you are leading people into wrong views.

In the raft analogy's terms: superimposition = carrying the raft on your head after crossing. Diminishing = throwing the raft away in the middle of the river.

**Fidelity (yathābhūta) = right use.** Knowing with fidelity that the raft is paratantra — dependently arisen, genuinely useful, but not the destination. Using it to cross, then setting it down upon arrival. The Yogācārabhūmi's expression is the most precise: "If a dharma truly exists, know it as truly existing; if a dharma truly does not exist, know it as truly not existing."[^33] Not adding one bit (no superimposition), not subtracting one bit (no diminishing), seeing things as they are, using them as they are.

### 3.5 The Raft Analogy Unfolded Through Āśraya-parāvṛtti

The Cheng weishi lun's āśraya-parāvṛtti mechanism (§2.10) provides precise Yogācāra translation for the raft analogy:

Transformation-abandonment = releasing the raft (abandoning the parikalpita superimposed upon paratantra).
Transformation-attainment = reaching the far shore (attaining the pariniṣpanna within paratantra).
The basis remains = paratantra is not destroyed.

Among the six stages of āśraya-parāvṛtti,[^34] "damage-and-benefit transformation" corresponds to the beginner approaching the raft — you have not yet boarded, but you begin reducing attachment to this shore (damaging defiled seeds' force) and increasing aspiration for the far shore (benefiting pure seeds' capacity). "Penetration transformation" corresponds to the path of seeing — you see the river's full scope for the first time (penetrating tathatā), knowing the raft can truly carry you across. "Cultivation transformation" corresponds to the ten bhūmis — you are on the water, progressing step by step, gradually severing the two obstructions' grossness. "Fruition-perfection transformation" corresponds to reaching the far shore — the vajra-like samādhi manifests, all grossness is permanently severed, and the complete transformation of the basis is instantaneously realized.

"Vast transformation" is the bodhisattva's distinctive posture — unlike the "inferior transformation" of the two vehicles (crossing and then disengaging), the bodhisattva, after crossing, "has neither relish for saṃsāra nor aversion to nirvāṇa"[^35] — not clinging to the far shore, not despising this shore, turning back to build rafts and teach raft-making for those still on this side. This is the bodhisattva path of skillful means.

### 3.6 Fundamental Wisdom Crosses; Post-Attainment Wisdom Ferries Others

The practice sequence unfolded through the raft analogy:

**Fundamental non-discriminating wisdom = crossing the river.** The Cheng weishi lun: "Non-discriminating wisdom realizes tathatā" — fundamental wisdom directly enters tathatā, as the river-crosser reaches the far shore. In that moment, no concepts are needed — not "raft," "river," "this shore," "that shore." You have simply arrived.

**Post-attainment cognition = after reaching shore, knowing illusion and working with it.** The Cheng weishi lun: "Within post-attainment cognition, one can then understand paratantra-natures as being like magical illusions" — after reaching shore, you genuinely know: the raft is illusion-like. Not "the raft does not exist" (that is diminishing), but "the raft is illusion-like — though existent, yet not truly real." You can still see the raft, you still know how to use it, but you are no longer bound by it.

The verse — "not without having seen tathatā can one understand all processes" — emphasizes that the sequence cannot be reversed: one must first see tathatā (cross the river) before genuinely knowing that all processes are illusion-like (knowing the raft is illusion-like). Many people attempt to skip "seeing tathatā" and proceed directly to declaring "everything is illusion-like" — that is not post-attainment cognition; that is verbal prajñā. S5-P02's knowing-versus-realization distinction resurfaces here: "knowing" everything is illusion-like is knowing; "realizing" everything is illusion-like is realization — the distance between the two may span many lifetimes.

The bodhisattva-path dimension of post-attainment cognition is particularly important: post-attainment cognition can manifest bodies, lands, and teach the true dharma to beings.[^36] The bodhisattva who has crossed, using post-attainment cognition, returns — they know the raft is illusion-like, but they do not, because the raft is illusion-like, refuse to build rafts for beings. They build rafts, teach people to use rafts, watch people cross — throughout, knowing illusion and working with it, neither carrying the raft while walking nor standing on the shore watching others drown.

### 3.7 The Bodhisattva's Raft: Knowing Dharma Is Illusion-Like Yet Still Ferrying Beings

The Yogācārabhūmi's upāya-kauśalya pāramitā provides the complete bodhisattva-path unfolding for the raft analogy.

The core tension within the six internal types of skillful means:[^37] "not abandoning saṃsāra" (not leaving this shore) combined with "turning in saṃsāra yet the mind is undefiled" (not being drowned by this shore's waters). The bodhisattva shuttles between this shore and the far shore — not because they have not crossed, but because after crossing they choose to return.

"Abiding yet not abiding" is the raft analogy's supreme form:[^38] abiding in worldly conditioned processes (building and steering rafts for others on the river) yet not abiding (not regarding the raft as one's personal achievement); seeing nirvāṇa's quiescence (knowing the far shore is there) yet likewise not abiding (not settling on the far shore in comfortable inaction).

Upāya-kauśalya is listed as the seventh pāramitā[^39] — after the six pāramitās. The six pāramitās (giving, discipline, patience, effort, meditation, prajñā) are all rafts; upāya-kauśalya is the capacity to "know how to use a raft without being bound by it." It is not a new tool — it is the wisdom of using tools.

### 3.8 A Vernacular Analogy: The Prescription

A person falls ill. A physician prescribes medicine.

Medicine is necessary — without it, the illness cannot be cured. This is the right use of paratantra.

The illness is cured, but they continue taking the medicine — "What if it comes back?" The dosage keeps increasing; eventually the medication dependency becomes a new illness. This is superimposition — the medicine has transformed from tool into object of attachment.

Another person hears that "medicine has side effects" and simply refuses to take it — "The body will heal on its own." The condition worsens. This is diminishing — denying the tool's value.

A third person: falls ill, takes medicine, recovers, stops. Neither thanking the medicine for "saving me" (that would be sacralizing the tool) nor complaining that the medicine "had side effects" (that would be denying the tool's value). Medicine is medicine; when it has done its work, it has done its work.

The dharma is a prescription. When the illness (affliction/ignorance) is cured (realizing tathatā), the medicine (dharma) has fulfilled its function. Continuing to take medicine = carrying the raft on your head. Throwing away the prescription = throwing the raft away in the river. Using it and then stopping = the Middle Way.

Vasubandhu's "harboring 'I am a bodhisattva' — this itself obstructs the mind" (P07 §3.4) unfolds within this analogy as: "I am someone who knows how to prescribe medicine," "I am someone who has already recovered" — these self-identifications are symptoms arising after the illness has been cured. You believe you have recovered, but the thought "I have recovered" is itself evidence that recovery is not yet complete.

---

## IV. Cross-Disciplinary Dialogue

### 4.1 Wittgenstein's Ladder ⚠️

Wittgenstein wrote in the *Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus* (6.54): anyone who understands him must, having climbed up through and upon these propositions, eventually throw away the ladder. One must transcend these propositions, and then one will see the world rightly.

The ladder analogy and the raft analogy are structurally isomorphic: the tool is necessary (you need it to climb/cross), the tool has completed its function upon reaching the destination (at the summit/the far shore), and continuing to clutch the tool becomes an impediment.

The difference lies in the destination's nature: Wittgenstein's ladder points toward an epistemological transformation ("see the world rightly"); the raft analogy points toward an ontological transformation (āśraya-parāvṛtti — a fundamental shift in the entire cognitive mode). The ladder analogy stops at "throw away the ladder"; the raft analogy does not stop at "set down the raft" — the bodhisattva-path unfolding is: you cross the river, and then you go back to help others build rafts. Wittgenstein does not discuss "going back to build ladders."

⚠️ This analogy is heuristic only. Wittgenstein's ladder operates within the context of analytic philosophy (the limits of language) and should not be treated as doctrinally equivalent to the raft analogy.

### 4.2 Kuhn's Paradigm Shift ⚠️

Thomas Kuhn's *The Structure of Scientific Revolutions* describes how scientific knowledge evolves: the old paradigm guides normal science, accumulating anomalies lead to crisis, and a new paradigm replaces the old (paradigm shift).

The raft analogy's structure can be mapped onto paradigm shift: old paradigm (the cognitive framework of this shore) → raft (practice method) → new paradigm (the cognitive framework of the far shore). The key analogical point: the old paradigm was effective within its range of applicability (the raft was useful on the river); the paradigm shift does not mean "the old paradigm was wrong" but "the old paradigm is no longer sufficient" (you have reached shore; the raft's function is complete); after the new paradigm is established, the old paradigm is repositioned rather than destroyed (the raft remains in the water; it has not disappeared).

A more precise mapping: superimposition = refusing paradigm shift (insisting the old paradigm applies to all situations). Diminishing = denying the old paradigm was ever effective ("Newtonian mechanics was wrong" — no, it was perfectly valid at its scale). Right understanding = knowing the old paradigm's range of applicability and limitations (the raft works on water but not on land).

⚠️ This analogy is taken only for its structural isomorphism. Scientific paradigm shift is a replacement of knowledge systems; the raft analogy points toward āśraya-parāvṛtti at the ontological level. The two forms of "letting go" are fundamentally different — scientists release the old paradigm because the new one is better; practitioners release the dharma not because there is "better dharma" but because practice itself has achieved its purpose. Use logic to reason, but do not use physics to prove.

---

## V. Middle Way Corrections

### ❌ "Dharma Should Be Let Go" ≠ "No Need to Practice"

This is the raft analogy's greatest pedagogical danger. If you "let go of dharma" before crossing the river, you are not following the Diamond Sūtra — you are drowning yourself. The Buddha in the Āgama prototype repeatedly emphasizes "riding this raft, I have arrived safely" — first arrive safely, then discuss letting go. The Diamond Sūtra's context is equally clear: "Already planted good roots under immeasurable millions of buddhas" — those who can understand the raft analogy are practitioners who have accumulated good roots over countless kalpas, not beginners who hear "let go" and assume they need not practice. S5-P07's dual-layer structure further reinforces this: the first half's teaching is genuinely effective (the raft truly carries you across); the second half does not negate the first but elevates it to a higher dimension.

### ❌ The Raft Analogy Is Not Relativism

"Dharma should be let go, how much more so non-dharma" does not mean "dharma and non-dharma are equally valid" or "anything goes." The raft is necessary while crossing the river — you cannot cross with a "non-raft" (a stone, a pile of mud). Kuiji's Middle Way analysis — "not grasping dharma departs from existence; not grasping non-dharma departs from non-existence" — makes clear: not grasping dharma and not grasping non-dharma are simultaneous, not an assertion that dharma and non-dharma are interchangeable. The Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra's warning is more direct: "If a dharma truly exists, know it as truly existing; if a dharma truly does not exist, know it as truly not existing" — faithful knowing is the key, not "it's all the same anyway."

### ❌ "Letting Go" Presupposes "Having Taken Up"

A person who has never crossed the river says "I have already let go of the raft" — they have not let go; they have never taken up. Letting go is an action with a prerequisite: you once practiced earnestly, genuinely used these tools, weathered storms on the river, and finally reached shore — then you let go. Speaking of letting go without having ever taken up is a classic symptom of verbal prajñā. S5-P02's knowing-versus-realization distinction applies directly here: "knowing" about letting go is knowing; "accomplishing" letting go is realization — being able to discourse eloquently to others does not count.

### ❌ "I Have Already Let Go of the Raft" = The Raft-Analogy Version of Vasubandhu's "Harboring 'I Am a Bodhisattva'"

S5-P07 §3.4 analyzed Vasubandhu's "harboring 'I am a bodhisattva' — this itself obstructs the mind" — the identification "I am a practitioner" is itself an obstruction. In the raft analogy, this illness takes a specific form: "I have already let go."

"I have already let go" — submit this statement to S5-P02's mirror. What does the mirror reveal? It reveals a "self" announcing its own "letting go." "Letting go" has become a new achievement; "I have already let go" has become a new self-portrait. You believe you have released the raft — but simultaneously you have picked up something more hidden: "the self that released the raft."

This is not sophistry — this is cognitive obstruction's precise mode of operation. You have upgraded from "carrying the raft while walking" to "not carrying the raft while walking and then telling everyone you are not carrying the raft" — the tool has changed; the structure has not. P07's framework explains why the Diamond Sūtra's second half must exist: the second half must cut precisely "the fact that I have already cut" — a new attachment.

---

## VI. Conclusion

### 6.1 Core Findings

This paper's argument can be summarized in five points:

First, the doctrinal core of the raft analogy is not "abandoning dharma" but the "right use" of paratantra — the tool is paratantra (genuinely useful), clinging to the tool as substantial becomes parikalpita (the tool becomes a prison), and using it then setting it down reveals pariniṣpanna (seeing the tool's true nature). This trisvabhāva mapping is fully consistent with S5-P01's jífēi mapping.

Second, the Madhyama Āgama's prototype teaching (paired snake-and-raft analogies) reveals the raft analogy's complete structure: the correctness of one's learning method matters more than whether one learns (snake analogy); after learning correctly, one must still release the tool at the appropriate time (raft analogy). The Diamond Sūtra compresses this into eight characters — "dharma should be let go, how much more so non-dharma" — yet the pedagogical logic is fully preserved.

Third, Vasubandhu's "not discarding dharma itself" and "non-abiding in accordance," Asaṅga's "because right cognition has arisen," and Kuiji's "departing both existence and non-existence, one returns to the Middle Way" — three Yogācāra masters confirm from different angles: the raft analogy teaches "non-abiding," not "negation"; the Middle Way, not nihilism.

Fourth, the Cheng weishi lun's āśraya-parāvṛtti mechanism provides precise Yogācāra translation for the raft analogy: the basis (paratantra) is not destroyed; what is abandoned is the parikalpita superimposed upon paratantra; what is attained is the pariniṣpanna within paratantra. The raft remains in the water, but you have reached shore — your relationship with the raft has changed; the raft itself has not.

Fifth, §6's position in the Diamond Sūtra's dual-layer structure (P07's framework) is "the first half's prophecy, the second half's entrance" — it uses the first half's language to preview the second half's theme: even the dharma itself must be released. P04 is therefore the S5 series' transitional paper from "breaking marks" to "breaking dharma."

### 6.2 Open Questions

The "right use of paratantra" principle revealed by the raft analogy will be further developed in subsequent papers:

Giving as a specific instance of the raft — in the Diamond Sūtra's merit comparisons, giving of seven treasures is a wholesome act within paratantra, while clinging to the merit of giving is carrying the raft while walking. The first half's merit comparisons use external measures (seven treasures); the second half uses internal measures (receiving, holding, reciting). The question of merit's distinct pedagogical functions across the two halves will be analyzed in S5-P05.

"Give rise to a mind that abides nowhere" — if the raft analogy teaches "use it and set it down," then "abide nowhere yet give rise to mind" is the raft analogy's inner-heart version: non-abiding = not carrying the raft; giving rise to mind = continuing to walk and ferry beings. The simultaneity of non-abiding and mind-arising — not first setting down and then walking, but walking while not carrying — will be developed in S5-P06.

The six similes of §32 (dream, illusion, bubble, shadow, dew, lightning) represent the final act of letting go — even the similes themselves are rafts. If, after reading the Diamond Sūtra, you cling to "all conditioned dharmas are like a dream, an illusion, a bubble, a shadow," you are carrying the very last raft on your head. This will be analyzed in S5-P09.

---

## References

### I. Primary Buddhist Sources

- *Jingang bore boluomi jing* (金剛般若波羅蜜經), trans. Kumārajīva (姚秦鳩摩羅什), T08, No. 235.
- *Zhong ahan jing* (中阿含經), trans. Gautama Saṃghadeva (東晉瞿曇僧伽提婆), T01, No. 26.
- *Jie shenmi jing* (解深密經), trans. Xuanzang (唐玄奘), T16, No. 676.
- *Jingang bore boluomi jing lun* (金剛般若波羅蜜經論), by Vasubandhu (天親菩薩), trans. Bodhiruci (元魏菩提流支), T25, No. 1511.
- *Nengduan jingang bore boluomiduo jing lun* (能斷金剛般若波羅蜜多經論), by Asaṅga (無著菩薩), trans. Yijing (唐義淨), T25, No. 1510b.
- *Nengduan jingang bore boluomiduo jing lun* (能斷金剛般若波羅蜜多經論), by Asaṅga (無著菩薩), trans. Dharmagupta (元魏達摩笈多), T25, No. 1510a.
- *Yuqie shidi lun* (瑜伽師地論), by Maitreya (彌勒菩薩), trans. Xuanzang (唐玄奘), T30, No. 1579.
- *Cheng weishi lun* (成唯識論), by Dharmapāla et al. (護法等菩薩), trans. Xuanzang (唐玄奘), T31, No. 1585.
- Kuiji (窺基), *Jingang bore boluomi jing zanshu* (金剛般若波羅蜜經讚述), T33, No. 1700.
- Kuiji (窺基), *Jingang bore jing shu* (金剛般若經疏), T33, No. 1700.

### II. Modern Scholarship

- Kuhn, Thomas S. *The Structure of Scientific Revolutions*. University of Chicago Press, 1962.
- Wittgenstein, Ludwig. *Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus*. 1921.

### III. Sūtra & Śāstra Index

| Abbreviation | Full Title | Taishō | Fascicles Cited |
|------|------|--------|-------------|
| Diamond Sūtra | Jingang bore boluomi jing | T08, No. 235 | Entire text |
| Madhyama Āgama | Zhong ahan jing | T01, No. 26 | Fascicle 54 |
| Saṃdhinirmocana | Jie shenmi jing | T16, No. 676 | Fascicles 2, 3 |
| Vasubandhu's Diamond Commentary | Jingang bore boluomi jing lun | T25, No. 1511 | Fascicle 1 |
| Asaṅga's Diamond Commentary (Yijing) | Nengduan jingang bore lun | T25, No. 1510b | Fascicle 1 |
| Asaṅga's Diamond Commentary (Dharmagupta) | Nengduan jingang bore lun | T25, No. 1510a | Fascicle 1 |
| Yogācārabhūmi | Yuqie shidi lun | T30, No. 1579 | Fascicles 45, 48, 49 |
| Cheng weishi lun | Cheng weishi lun | T31, No. 1585 | Fascicles 8, 9, 10 |
| Kuiji's Zànshù | Jingang bore boluomi jing zanshu | T33, No. 1700 | Fascicles 2, 3, 4 |
| Kuiji's Commentary | Jingang bore jing shu | T33, No. 1700 | Fascicle 1 |

---

## Cross-Reference Index

| Paper | Relationship to This Paper |
|------|-------------|
| S5-P01 The Jífēi Structure and Trisvabhāva | P01's Pointing-at-the-Moon mapping (X=paratantra, is-not=negates parikalpita, is-called=pariniṣpanna) directly applied to the raft analogy's trisvabhāva mapping |
| S5-P02 The Kōan Mirror | The knowing/realization distinction provides criteria for judging whether "letting go" is genuine: "knowing" about letting go ≠ "accomplishing" letting go. "I have already let go" = a new self-portrait submitted to the mirror |
| S5-P03 All Marks Are Illusory | P03 = first cut (cutting marks), P04 = preview of the second cut (cutting dharma). §5→§6 is direct sūtra sequencing |
| S5-P07 The Diamond Sūtra's Self-Replay | P07 reveals §6's special position in the dual-layer structure: the first half's prophecy, the second half's entrance. Vasubandhu's "harboring 'I am a bodhisattva'" = the precise diagnosis of carrying the raft while walking |
| S5-P05 Merit Comparisons | Giving is a specific instance of the raft — in merit comparisons, giving is wholesome activity (right use of paratantra); clinging to the merit of giving is carrying the raft (parikalpita) |
| S5-P06 Abide Nowhere Yet Give Rise to Mind | "Abide nowhere yet give rise to mind" = the inner-heart version of the raft analogy — non-abiding = not carrying the raft; giving rise to mind = continuing to walk and ferry beings |
| S5-P09 All Conditioned Dharmas Are Like a Dream | §32's six similes = the final act of letting go — even similes themselves are rafts |
| S5-P10 From the Hundred Dharmas to the Diamond | S3's hundred dharmas are a precision-crafted raft; S5 teaches you to use it and set it down. P07's framework: S3 = construction (building the raft), S5 = elevation (using then releasing the raft) |
| S3 Hundred Dharmas Series | The hundred dharmas are a paratantra classification system — all one hundred dharmas are rafts |
| S2-P09 No Suffering, No Path | The Four Noble Truths are themselves a raft — "no suffering, no origination, no cessation, no path" = the jífēi treatment of the Four Truths, corresponding to the raft analogy's dharma-emptiness teaching |

---

## Footnotes

[^1]: Kuiji, *Jingang bore boluomi jing zanshu*, fascicle 2: 「無我相人相眾生相壽者相，是除我執也。無法相亦無非法相，是除法執也」 — "'No mark of self, others, beings, or life-span' removes self-grasping; 'no dharma-mark and no non-dharma-mark' removes dharma-grasping," T33, No. 1700.

[^2]: *Jingang bore boluomi jing*, §6: 「無法相，亦無非法相。何以故？……法尚應捨，何況非法」 — "No dharma-mark, and no non-dharma-mark... dharma should still be let go, how much more so non-dharma," T08, No. 235.

[^3]: *Jingang bore boluomi jing*, §6: 「已於無量千萬佛所種諸善根。聞是章句，乃至一念生淨信者」 — "Already planted good roots under immeasurable millions of buddhas; hearing these phrases, those who give rise to even a single thought of pure faith," T08, No. 235.

[^4]: *Jingang bore boluomi jing*, §7: 「無有定法名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，亦無有定法如來可說」 — "There is no fixed dharma called anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi, and no fixed dharma the Tathāgata could speak," T08, No. 235.

[^5]: *Zhong ahan jing*, fascicle 54, Alagaddūpama Sutta (200th sūtra): 「譬若如人，欲得捉蛇」 — "Suppose a person wishes to catch a snake," the snake analogy, T01, No. 26.

[^6]: *Zhong ahan jing*, fascicle 54, Alagaddūpama Sutta: 「猶如山水甚深極廣，長流駛疾……縛作椑栰，乘之而度」 — "Suppose a great mountain torrent, deep and wide, with a swift current... binding a raft and riding it across," T01, No. 26.

[^7]: *Zhong ahan jing*, fascicle 54, Alagaddūpama Sutta: 「當以捨是法，況非法耶」 — "You should let go of dharma — how much more so non-dharma?" T01, No. 26.

[^8]: *Jingang bore boluomi jing*, §21: 「說法者，無法可說，是名說法」 — "One who speaks dharma has no dharma to speak; this is called speaking dharma," T08, No. 235.

[^9]: *Jingang bore boluomi jing*, entire text: over ten semantic uses of 法 ("dharma/dharmas") catalogued, T08, No. 235. See §2.5 of this paper and retrieval log Q2.

[^10]: *Jingang bore boluomi jing lun*, fascicle 1: 「如來常說筏喻法門，是法應捨，非捨法故」 — "The Tathāgata always teaches the raft-analogy dharma-gate: this dharma should be let go — not that dharma itself is discarded," Vasubandhu's version, T25, No. 1511. Note: 「非捨法故」 = not discarding dharma itself.

[^11]: *Jingang bore boluomi jing lun*, fascicle 1: 「不應如聲取法……隨順第一義智正說如是取」 — "Should not grasp dharma as mere sound... in accordance with ultimate truth-wisdom, correctly grasp thus," Vasubandhu's gloss on "should not grasp dharma, nor should one not grasp dharma," T25, No. 1511.

[^12]: *Jingang bore boluomi jing lun*, fascicle 1: 「彼不住隨順，於法中證智，如人捨船栰，法中義亦然」 — "Not abiding, in accordance, / attaining wisdom within dharma, / like a person releasing a raft — / so too with the meaning within dharma," Vasubandhu's raft-analogy verse, T25, No. 1511.

[^13]: *Nengduan jingang bore boluomiduo jing lun*, fascicle 1: 「法尚應捨，實想生故；何況非法者，理不應故」 — "Dharma should still be let go — because right cognition has arisen; how much more so non-dharma — because it does not accord with principle," Asaṅga's raft-analogy gloss, T25, No. 1510b.

[^14]: *Nengduan jingang bore boluomiduo jing lun*, fascicle 1: five types of wrong grasping (五種邪取) — non-Buddhists, Buddhist worldlings and śrāvakas, overconfident bodhisattvas, mundane shared-notion samādhi, no-notion samādhi, T25, No. 1510b.

[^15]: Kuiji, *Jingang bore boluomi jing zanshu*, fascicle 2: 「計一切法實有體性，名為法執。然佛說小乘以除我執，今說般若重為此者……正除法執，兼明我空」 — "Conceiving that all dharmas have real self-nature is called dharma-grasping... Prajñā's primary function is removing dharma-grasping while also illuminating person-emptiness," T33, No. 1700.

[^16]: Kuiji, *Jingang bore boluomi jing zanshu*, fascicle 4: 「不應取法，離有也；不應取非法，離無也。既離有無，即歸中道」 — "Not grasping dharma departs from existence; not grasping non-dharma departs from non-existence; departing both, one returns to the Middle Way," T33, No. 1700.

[^17]: Kuiji, *Jingang bore boluomi jing zanshu*, fascicle 4: 「義不自顯，必假於言」, citing the *Vimalakīrti*: 「無離文字說解脫也」 — "Meaning does not reveal itself; it necessarily relies on words" and "There is no liberation apart from written words," T33, No. 1700.

[^18]: Kuiji, *Jingang bore boluomi jing zanshu*, fascicle 4: 「未除細執者，謂二執俱生任運起者」 — "Those who have not yet removed the subtle grasping — the innate, spontaneously arising forms of the two graspings," T33, No. 1700.

[^19]: Kuiji, *Jingang bore jing shu*, fascicle 1: 「將欲證真，必因言說；及其正證，即不假言，如筏至岸，即無所用也」 — "When one is about to realize truth, one necessarily relies on verbal teaching; at the moment of true realization, words are no longer needed — like a raft that, upon reaching shore, has no further use," T33, No. 1700.

[^20]: *Jie shenmi jing*, fascicle 2: sphaṭika (crystal) analogy — 「如彼清淨頗胝迦上所有染色相應，依他起相上遍計所執相言說習氣，當知亦爾」 — "Just as the colors appearing on the pure crystal correspond to verbal habituation of the parikalpita upon the paratantra," T16, No. 676.

[^21]: *Jie shenmi jing*, fascicle 2: 「若諸菩薩能於諸法依他起相上，如實了知遍計所執相，即能如實了知一切無相之法」 — "If bodhisattvas can, upon the paratantra-nature of all dharmas, truly understand the parikalpita, they can truly understand all markless dharmas," T16, No. 676.

[^22]: *Jie shenmi jing*, fascicle 2: 「於一切法決定皆無自性……誹撥三相……是起廣大業障方便」 — "'All dharmas decidedly have no self-nature'... repudiating all three natures... creates the means for vast karmic obstruction," T16, No. 676.

[^23]: *Cheng weishi lun*, fascicle 9: 「無得不思議，是出世間智，捨二麁重故，便證得轉依」 — "Without attainment, inconceivable, this is supramundane wisdom; by abandoning the two kinds of grossness, one thereby attains the transformation of the basis," T31, No. 1585.

[^24]: *Cheng weishi lun*, fascicle 9: 「依謂所依，即依他起……轉捨依他起上遍計所執，及能轉得依他起中圓成實性」 — "'Basis' means paratantra... one abandons the parikalpita superimposed upon paratantra and attains the pariniṣpanna within paratantra," T31, No. 1585.

[^25]: *Cheng weishi lun*, fascicle 8: 「無分別智證真如已，後得智中，方能了達依他起性如幻事等」 — "After non-discriminating wisdom has realized tathatā, within post-attainment cognition one can then understand paratantra as being like magical illusions," T31, No. 1585.

[^26]: *Cheng weishi lun*, fascicle 8: 「非不見真如，而能了諸行，皆如幻事等，雖有而非真」 — "Not without having seen tathatā can one understand all processes as being like magical illusions — though existent, yet not truly real," T31, No. 1585.

[^27]: *Cheng weishi lun*, fascicle 9: post-attainment cognition possesses both perceiving and perceived aspects — 「現身土等，為諸有情說正法故」 — "manifesting bodies, lands, and so forth, teaching the true dharma to beings," T31, No. 1585.

[^28]: *Yuqie shidi lun*, fascicle 45: 「此經不說一切諸法都無所有」 — "This sūtra does not say that all dharmas are completely nonexistent," the section on skillful-means harmonization, T30, No. 1579.

[^29]: *Yuqie shidi lun*, fascicle 45: 「不取少分，不捨少分，不作損減，不作增益。若法實有，知為實有；若法實無，知為實無」 — "Neither taking up a fraction, nor discarding a fraction; neither diminishing nor superimposing. If a dharma truly exists, know it as truly existing; if truly nonexistent, know it as truly nonexistent," T30, No. 1579.

[^30]: *Yuqie shidi lun*, fascicle 48: 「於一切世間行無染而行……住而不住」 — "Conducting oneself in all worldly activities without defilement... abiding yet not abiding," T30, No. 1579.

[^31]: Kuiji, *Jingang bore boluomi jing zanshu*, fascicle 4: 「實相法尚不可得，況離實相外一切法耶。除諸法實相，餘皆魔事」 — "The dharma of true reality is itself unobtainable — how much less all dharmas outside true reality? Apart from the true reality of all dharmas, everything else is the work of Māra," T33, No. 1700.

[^32]: *Jie shenmi jing*, fascicle 2: 「言說熏習心故、言說隨覺故、言說隨眠故，於依他起自性及圓成實自性中，執著遍計所執自性」 — "Through verbal habituation of the mind, verbal awakening, and verbal dormancy, upon paratantra and pariniṣpanna one grasps the parikalpita," T16, No. 676.

[^33]: *Yuqie shidi lun*, fascicle 45: 「若法實有，知為實有；若法實無，知為實無；如其所知，如是開示」 — "If a dharma truly exists, know it as truly existing; if truly nonexistent, know it as truly nonexistent; as one knows, so one teaches," T30, No. 1579.

[^34]: *Cheng weishi lun*, fascicle 10: 「轉依位別，略有六種」 — six stages of āśraya-parāvṛtti: damage-and-benefit, penetration, cultivation, fruition-perfection, inferior, and vast transformation, T31, No. 1585.

[^35]: *Cheng weishi lun*, fascicle 10: 「廣大轉……生死涅槃俱無欣厭」 — "Vast transformation... neither relish for saṃsāra nor aversion to nirvāṇa," T31, No. 1585.

[^36]: *Cheng weishi lun*, fascicle 9: post-attainment cognition — 「現身土等，為諸有情說正法故」 — "manifesting bodies, lands, and so forth, teaching the true dharma to beings," T31, No. 1585.

[^37]: *Yuqie shidi lun*, fascicle 45: six internal types of skillful means — 「不捨生死」(4th) +「輪轉生死而心不染」(5th) — "not abandoning saṃsāra" and "turning in saṃsāra yet the mind is undefiled," T30, No. 1579.

[^38]: *Yuqie shidi lun*, fascicle 48: 「於諸世間有為諸行，住而不住；雖於寂滅見寂靜德，而亦不住」 — "Abiding yet not abiding in worldly conditioned processes; though seeing nirvāṇa's quiescent merit, likewise not abiding," T30, No. 1579.

[^39]: *Yuqie shidi lun*, fascicle 49: 「方便善巧波羅蜜多」 listed as the seventh pāramitā, T30, No. 1579.

---

*Pointing at the Moon · S5-P04 · Dharma Should Still Be Let Go · Version 1.0 · 2026*
*The true nature of all dharmas — just as it is.*

---

*All scriptural citations in this study have been verified against the CBETA Chinese Electronic Tripiṭaka Collection.*

*This research paper is released under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0.*

*Source repository: https://github.com/pointing-at-the-moon/dharma-research*