The Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines
Chapter 10: Illusion-Like
Toh 10
Degé Kangyur, vol. 29 (shes phyin, khri brgyad, ka), folios 1.a–300.a; vol. 30 (shes phyin, khri brgyad, kha), folios 1.a–304.a; vol. 31 (shes phyin, khri brgyad, ga), folios 1.a–206.a
- Jinamitra
- Surendrabodhi
- Yeshé Dé
Imprint

Translated by Gareth Sparham
under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha
First published 2022
Current version v 1.1.4 (2025)
Generated by 84000 Reading Room v2.26.1
84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha is a global non-profit initiative to translate all the Buddha’s words into modern languages, and to make them available to everyone.

This work is provided under the protection of a Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND (Attribution - Non-commercial - No-derivatives) 3.0 copyright. It may be copied or printed for fair use, but only with full attribution, and not for commercial advantage or personal compensation. For full details, see the Creative Commons license.
Table of Contents
Summary
The Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines is one version of the Long Perfection of Wisdom sūtras that developed in South and South-Central Asia in tandem with the Eight Thousand version, probably during the first five hundred years of the Common Era. It contains many of the passages in the oldest extant Long Perfection of Wisdom text (the Gilgit manuscript in Sanskrit), and is similar in structure to the other versions of the Long Perfection of Wisdom sūtras (the One Hundred Thousand and Twenty-Five Thousand) in Tibetan in the Kangyur. While setting forth the sacred fundamental doctrines of Buddhist practice with veneration, it simultaneously exhorts the reader to reject them as an object of attachment, its recurring message being that all dharmas without exception lack any intrinsic nature.
The sūtra can be divided loosely into three parts: an introductory section that sets the scene, a long central section, and three concluding chapters that consist of two important summaries of the long central section. The first of these (chapter 84) is in verse and also circulates as a separate work called The Verse Summary of the Jewel Qualities (Toh 13). The second summary is in the form of the story of Sadāprarudita and his guru Dharmodgata (chapters 85 and 86), after which the text concludes with the Buddha entrusting the work to his close companion Ānanda.
Acknowledgements
This sūtra was translated by Gareth Sparham under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
The Translator’s Acknowledgments
This is a good occasion to remember and thank my friend Nicholas Ribush, who first gave me a copy of Edward Conze’s translation of The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines in 1973. I also thank the Tibetan teachers and students at the Riklam Lobdra in Dharamshala, India, where I began to study the Perfection of Wisdom, for their kindness and patience; Jeffrey Hopkins and Elizabeth Napper, who steered me in the direction of the Perfection of Wisdom and have been very kind to me over the years; and Ashok Aklujkar and others at the University of British Columbia in Canada, who taught me Sanskrit and Indian culture while I was writing my dissertation on Haribhadra’s Perfection of Wisdom commentary. I thank the hermits in the hills above Riklam Lobdra and the many Tibetan scholars and practitioners who encouraged me while I continued working on the Perfection of Wisdom after I graduated from the University of British Columbia. I thank all those who continued to support me as a monk and scholar after the violent death of my friend and mentor toward the end of the millennium. I thank those at the University of Michigan and then at the University of California (Berkeley), particularly Donald Lopez and Jacob Dalton, who enabled me to complete the set of four volumes of translations from Sanskrit of the Perfection of Wisdom commentaries by Haribhadra and Āryavimuktisena and four volumes of the fourteenth-century Tibetan commentary on the Perfection of Wisdom by Tsongkhapa. I thank Gene Smith, who introduced me to 84000. I thank everyone at 84000: Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche and the sponsors; the scholars, translators, editors, and technicians; and all the other indispensable people whose work has made this translation of The Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines and its accompanying commentary possible.
Around me everything I see would be part of a perfect road if I had better driving skills.Where I was born, where everything is made of concrete, it too is a perfect place.Everyone I have been with, everyone who is near me now, and even those I have forgotten—there is no one who has not helped me.So, I bow to everyone and to the world and ask for patience, and, as a boon, a smile.
Acknowledgment of Sponsors
We gratefully acknowledge the generous sponsorship of Matthew Yizhen Kong, Steven Ye Kong and family; An Zhang, Hannah Zhang, Lucas Zhang, Aiden Zhang, Jinglan Chi, Jingcan Chi, Jinghui Chi and family, Hong Zhang and family; Mao Guirong, Zhang Yikun, Chi Linlin; and Joseph Tse, Patricia Tse and family. Their support has helped make the work on this translation possible.
Text Body
The Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines
Chapter 10: Illusion-Like
Then venerable Subhūti said to the Lord, “Lord, suppose someone were to ask, ‘Does this illusory being, having trained in the perfection of wisdom, go forth to the knowledge of all aspects or reach the knowledge of all aspects?’ What, Lord, should be said to that questioner? And similarly, suppose someone were to ask, ‘Does this illusory being, having trained in the perfection of concentration, perfection of perseverance, perfection of patience, perfection of morality, and perfection of giving go forth to the knowledge of all aspects or reach the knowledge of all aspects?’ What, Lord, should be said to that questioner? And as to ‘Do they, having trained in, up to the thirty-seven dharmas on the side of awakening, [F.97.a] up to the knowledge of all aspects, go forth to the knowledge of all aspects or reach the knowledge of all aspects?’—what, Lord, should be said to that questioner?”
The Lord replied, “Subhūti, I will put a question about that right to you. Answer as best you can. What do you think about this: Is illusion one thing and form another? Is illusion one thing and feeling, perception, volitional factors, and consciousness another?”
The Lord then asked, “Subhūti, what do you think about this: Is illusion one thing and the eyes another, or is illusion one thing and the ears, nose, tongue, body, and thinking mind another? Or is illusion one thing and a form another, or is illusion one thing and a sound, a smell, a taste, a feeling, and a dharma another? Or is illusion one thing and eye consciousness another, or is illusion one thing and ear consciousness, nose consciousness, tongue consciousness, body consciousness, and thinking-mind consciousness another? Or is illusion one thing and eye contact another, or is illusion one thing and ear contact, nose contact, tongue contact, body contact, and thinking-mind contact another?”
The Lord then asked, “Subhūti, what do you think about this: Is illusion one thing and the pleasurable, or suffering, or neither pleasurable nor suffering [F.97.b] feeling from the condition of eye contact another? Is illusion one thing and the pleasurable, or suffering, or neither pleasurable nor suffering feeling from the condition of ear contact, feeling from the condition of nose contact, feeling from the condition of tongue contact, feeling from the condition of body contact, or feeling from the condition of thinking-mind contact another?”
The Lord then asked, “Subhūti, what do you think about this: is illusion one thing and the thirty-seven dharmas on the side of awakening another?”
The Lord then asked, “Subhūti, what do you think about this: is illusion one thing and emptiness another, is illusion one thing and signlessness another, or is illusion one thing and wishlessness another?”
The Lord then asked, “Subhūti, what do you think about this: is illusion one thing and the ten tathāgata powers another, or is illusion one thing and … up to the eighteen distinct attributes of a buddha another?”
The Lord then asked, “Subhūti, what do you think about this: is illusion one thing and the knowledge of all aspects another?”
“No, Lord,” answered Subhūti.193 “Illusion is not one thing, Lord, and form another; form is itself illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself form. Illusion is not one thing, Lord, [F.98.a] and feeling, perception, volitional factors, and consciousness another; feeling, perception, volitional factors, and consciousness are themselves illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself feeling, perception, volitional factors, and consciousness. Illusion is not one thing, Lord, and the eyes themselves another; the eyes are themselves illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself the eyes. Illusion is not one thing, Lord, and the ears … nose … tongue … body … and thinking mind another; the thinking mind is itself illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself the thinking mind. Illusion is not one thing, Lord, and a form itself another; a form is itself illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself a form. Illusion is not one thing, Lord, and a sound … a smell … a taste … a feeling … and a dharma another; dharmas are themselves illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself dharmas. Illusion is not one thing, Lord, and eye consciousness itself another; eye consciousness is itself illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself eye consciousness. Illusion is not one thing, Lord, and ear consciousness, nose consciousness, tongue consciousness, body consciousness, and thinking-mind consciousness another; ear consciousness … nose consciousness … tongue consciousness … body consciousness … and thinking-mind consciousness is itself illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself thinking-mind consciousness. Illusion is not one thing, Lord, and eye contact another; eye contact is itself illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself eye contact. Illusion is not one thing, Lord, and ear contact, [F.98.b] nose contact, tongue contact, body contact, and thinking-mind contact another; ear contact … nose contact … tongue contact … body contact … and thinking-mind contact is itself illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself thinking-mind contact. Illusion is not one thing, Lord, and the pleasurable, or suffering, or neither pleasurable nor suffering feeling from the condition of eye contact another; the pleasurable, or suffering, or neither pleasurable nor suffering feeling from the condition of eye contact is itself illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself the pleasurable, or suffering, or neither pleasurable nor suffering feeling from the condition of eye contact. Illusion is not one thing, Lord, and the pleasurable, or suffering, or neither pleasurable nor suffering feeling from the condition of ear contact, feeling from the condition of nose contact, feeling from the condition of tongue contact, feeling from the condition of body contact, and feeling from the condition of thinking-mind contact another; the pleasurable, or suffering, or neither pleasurable nor suffering feeling from the condition of ear contact … feeling from the condition of nose contact … feeling from the condition of tongue contact … feeling from the condition of body contact … and feeling from the condition of thinking-mind contact are themselves illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself the pleasurable, or suffering, or neither pleasurable nor suffering feeling from the condition of thinking-mind contact. Illusion is not one thing, Lord, and the thirty-seven dharmas on the side of awakening another; the thirty-seven dharmas on the side of awakening are themselves illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself the thirty-seven dharmas on the side of awakening. Illusion is not one thing, Lord, and emptiness another; [F.99.a] emptiness is itself illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself emptiness. Illusion is not one thing, Lord, and signlessness another; signlessness is itself illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself signlessness. Illusion is not one thing, Lord, and wishlessness another; wishlessness is itself illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself wishlessness. Illusion is not one thing, Lord, and the ten tathāgata powers another; the ten tathāgata powers are themselves illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself the ten tathāgata powers. Illusion is not one thing, Lord, and … up to the eighteen distinct attributes of a buddha another; up to the eighteen distinct attributes of a buddha are themselves illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself … up to the eighteen distinct attributes of a buddha. Illusion is not one thing, Lord, and the knowledge of all aspects another; the knowledge of all aspects is itself illusion, Lord, and illusion is itself the knowledge of all aspects.”
The Lord then asked, “Subhūti, what do you think about this: is there defilement and purification of illusion?”
The Lord then asked, “Subhūti, what do you think about this: is there production and stopping of illusion?”
The Lord then asked, “Subhūti, what do you think about this: does someone who has no production, no stopping, no defilement, [F.99.b] and no purification train in the perfection of wisdom, or go forth to the knowledge of all aspects, up to or reach the knowledge of all aspects?”
The Lord then asked, “Subhūti, what do you think about this: is bodhisattva used conventionally as just a name and conventional term for these five appropriating aggregates?”194
The Lord then asked, “Subhūti, what do you think about this: can you apprehend production, stopping, defilement, or purification of these five appropriating aggregates that are used conventionally as just names and conventional terms?”
The Lord then asked, “Subhūti, what do you think about this: does that of which there is no name and causal sign, no conventional term, no designation, no convention, no name and no name designation, no body, no physical activity, no speech, no verbal activity, no thinking mind, no thinking-mind activity—of which there is no production, stopping, defilement, or purification—train in the perfection of wisdom and go forth to the knowledge of all aspects, or do you think it reaches the knowledge of all aspects?”
“Subhūti,” said the Lord, “when bodhisattva great beings train in [F.100.a] the perfection of wisdom like that, by way of not apprehending anything, they go forth to the knowledge of all aspects and reach the knowledge of all aspects.”
Subhūti replied,195 “Lord, bodhisattva great beings, then, training in the perfection of wisdom like that, who want to go forth to the knowledge of all aspects, should train for unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening as an illusory person would train. And why? Because, Lord, these five aggregates are just what should be known to be an illusory person.”
The Lord then asked, “Subhūti, what do you think about this: do these five aggregates, having trained in the perfection of wisdom, go forth to the knowledge of all aspects, or do you think they reach the knowledge of all aspects?”
“No, Lord,” answered Subhūti. “And why? Because, Lord, they are nonexistent things, and you cannot apprehend nonexistent things.”
The Lord then asked, “Subhūti, what do you think about this: do the five dream-like aggregates, having trained in the perfection of wisdom, go forth to the knowledge of all aspects?”
“No, Lord,” answered Subhūti. “And why? Because, Lord, a dream is a nonexistent thing, and you cannot apprehend a nonexistent thing.”
The Lord then asked, “Subhūti, what do you think about this: do the five aggregates that are like an echo, like an apparition, like an image of a moon in water, like an illusion, like a mirage, like a magical creation, and like a reflection in a mirror, having trained in the perfection [F.100.b] of wisdom, go forth to the knowledge of all aspects?”
“No, Lord,” answered Subhūti. “And why? Because, Lord, an echo is the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature, also an apparition is the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature, also an image of a moon in water is the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature, also an illusion is the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature, also a mirage is the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature, also a magical creation is the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature, and also a reflection in a mirror is the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature, and that nonexistence of an intrinsic nature cannot be apprehended. And why? Because, Lord, form is like an illusion, and feeling … perception … volitional factors … and consciousness is like an illusion, and what that consciousness is, the six faculties are. They are the five aggregates,196 and you cannot apprehend them, because of inner emptiness, up to because of the emptiness that is the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature.”
Venerable Subhūti then asked the Lord, “Lord, if bodhisattva great beings who have newly set out in the vehicle were to hear this exposition, would they not197 tremble, feel frightened, and become terrified?”
“Subhūti,” answered the Lord, “if they are bodhisattva great beings who have newly set out in the vehicle, and are those without skillful means who have not been taken in hand by a spiritual friend, they will tremble, feel frightened, and become terrified.”
Subhūti asked, “Lord, what skillful means do bodhisattva great beings who have newly set out in the vehicle have not to tremble, feel frightened, or become terrified when hearing this exposition?”
“Subhūti,” answered the Lord, “here [F.101.a] bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom with attention connected with the knowledge of all aspects analytically understand about form its impermanent aspect, but do not apprehend it; and with attention connected with the knowledge of all aspects they analytically understand about feeling, perception, volitional factors, and consciousness their impermanent aspect, but do not apprehend it. Subhūti, you should know that this is the skillful means of bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“Furthermore, Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom with attention connected with the knowledge of all aspects analytically understand about form its suffering aspect, se