The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Ten Thousand Lines
Neither Coming nor Going

The Blessed One then addressed the venerable Su­bhūti as follows: “Su­bhūti, you have said that this Great Vehicle neither comes nor goes, and nor does it stay. Su­bhūti, that is so! You have spoken correctly. Su­bhūti, in this supreme vehicle, the Great Vehicle, no coming is indeed discernible, nor are going and abiding discernible. If you ask why, Su­bhūti, it is because all things are unmoving; for that reason, they do not come from anywhere, they do not go anywhere, and they do not even abide anywhere. If you ask why, Su­bhūti, it is because physical forms do not come from anywhere, they do not go anywhere, and they do not abide anywhere. Similarly, feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness also do not come from anywhere, they do not go anywhere, and they do not abide anywhere.

“Su­bhūti, the nature of physical forms does not come from anywhere, it does not go anywhere, and it does not abide anywhere. [F.145.a] Similarly, the real nature of physical forms, the essential nature of physical forms, and the defining characteristics of the essential nature of physical forms do not come from anywhere, they do not go anywhere, and they do not even abide anywhere.

“Similarly, Su­bhūti, the nature of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness does not come from anywhere, does not go anywhere, and does not even abide anywhere. Su­bhūti, the real nature of feelings, the essential nature of feelings, and the defining characteristics of the essential nature of feelings, and similarly, the real nature of perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness; the essential nature of consciousness, [and so forth]; and the defining characteristics of the essential nature of consciousness [and so forth] do not come from anywhere, they do not go anywhere, and they do not even abide anywhere.

“Su­bhūti, the eyes, the nature of the eyes, the real nature of the eyes, the essential nature of the eyes, and the defining characteristics of the essential nature of the eyes do not come from anywhere, they do not go anywhere, and they do not even abide anywhere. Similarly, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the body, the mental faculty, the nature of the mental faculty [and so forth], the real nature of the mental faculty [and so forth], the essential nature of the mental faculty [and so forth], and the defining characteristics of the mental faculty [and so forth] do not come from anywhere, they do not go anywhere, and they do not even abide anywhere.

“Su­bhūti, the earth element, the nature of the earth element, the real nature of the earth element, the essential nature of the earth element, and the defining characteristics of the essential nature of the earth element do not come from anywhere, they do not go anywhere, and they do not even abide anywhere. Similarly, the water element, the fire element, the wind element, the space element, and the consciousness element, along with the nature of the consciousness element [and so forth], the real nature of the consciousness element [and so forth], the essential nature of the consciousness element [and so forth], and the defining characteristics of the essential nature of the consciousness element [and so forth] do not come from anywhere, [F.145.b] they do not go anywhere, and they do not even abide anywhere.

“Su­bhūti, the real nature does not come from anywhere, does not go anywhere, and does not even abide anywhere. Su­bhūti, the nature of the real nature, the real nature of the real nature, the essential nature of the real nature, and the defining characteristics of the essential nature of the real nature do not come from anywhere, do not go anywhere, and do not even abide anywhere.

“Su­bhūti, the finality of existence, the nature of the finality of existence, the real nature of the finality of existence, the essential nature of the finality of existence, and the defining characteristics of the essential nature of the finality of existence do not come from anywhere, do not go anywhere, and do not even abide anywhere.

“Su­bhūti, the inconceivable expanse, the nature of the inconceivable expanse, the real nature of the inconceivable expanse, the essential nature of the inconceivable expanse, and the defining characteristics of the essential nature of the inconceivable expanse do not come from anywhere, do not go anywhere, and do not even abide anywhere.

“Su­bhūti, the transcendent perfection of generosity, the nature of the transcendent perfection of generosity, the real nature of the transcendent perfection of generosity, the essential nature of the transcendent perfection of generosity, and the defining characteristics of the essential nature of the transcendent perfection of generosity do not come from anywhere, do not go anywhere, and do not even abide anywhere. Similarly, the transcendent perfection of ethical discipline, the transcendent perfection of tolerance, the transcendent perfection of perseverance, the transcendent perfection of meditative concentration, and the transcendent perfection of wisdom, along with the nature of the transcendent perfection of wisdom [and so forth], the real nature of the transcendent perfection of wisdom [and so forth], the essential nature of the transcendent perfection of wisdom [and so forth], and the defining characteristics of the essential nature of the transcendent perfection of wisdom [and so forth] do not come from anywhere, [F.146.a] do not go anywhere, and do not even abide anywhere.

“Su­bhūti, in the same vein, the applications of mindfulness, the nature of the applications of mindfulness, the real nature of the applications of mindfulness, the essential nature of the applications of mindfulness, and the defining characteristics of the essential nature of the applications of mindfulness do not come from anywhere, do not go anywhere, and do not even abide anywhere. The same refrain as before should also be extensively applied [to the other causal and fruitional attributes], up to and including the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas.

“Su­bhūti, enlightenment, the nature of enlightenment, the real nature of enlightenment, the essential nature of enlightenment, and the defining characteristics of the essential nature of enlightenment do not come from anywhere, do not go anywhere, and do not even abide anywhere.

“Su­bhūti, the buddhas, the nature of the buddhas, the real nature of the buddhas, the essential nature of the buddhas, and the defining characteristics of the essential nature of the buddhas do not come from anywhere, do not go anywhere, and do not even abide anywhere.

“Su­bhūti, conditioned elements, the nature of conditioned elements, the real nature of conditioned elements, the essential nature of conditioned elements, and the defining characteristics of the essential nature of conditioned elements do not come from anywhere, do not go anywhere, and do not even abide anywhere.

“Su­bhūti, you have said that this vehicle apprehends neither the limit of past time, nor does it apprehend the limit of future time or the intervening [present], and that this vehicle is styled the Great Vehicle because it remains identical throughout the three times. That is so, Su­bhūti! That is so! It is just as you have spoken. This Great Vehicle apprehends neither the limit of past time, nor does it apprehend the limit of future time or the intervening [present]. Indeed, this vehicle is called the Great Vehicle because it remains identical throughout the three times. [F.146.b] If you ask why, Su­bhūti, it is because past time is empty of the past, future time is empty of the future, and the present time is empty of the present. The sameness of the three times is empty of the sameness of the three times. The Great Vehicle is empty of the Great Vehicle. The bodhisattva is empty of the bodhisattva.

“Su­bhūti, emptiness is not one, not two, not three, not four, not five, but nor is it anything else. Su­bhūti, this is the vehicle of the bodhisattvas, which maintains sameness throughout the three times. It does not apprehend [concepts of] ‘same’ and ‘not same.’ It does not apprehend desire and dispassion. It does not apprehend hatred and the absence of hatred. It does not apprehend delusion and the absence of delusion, or pride [and its absence].277 In the same vein, it does not apprehend virtuous actions and non-virtuous actions, or even determinate and indeterminate [actions]. It does not apprehend permanence and impermanence. It does not apprehend happiness and suffering, or even the absence of suffering and the absence of happiness. It does not apprehend a self and a non-self. It does not apprehend the world system of desire. It does not apprehend the world system of form and the world system of formlessness. It does not apprehend the transcendence of the world system of desire. It does not apprehend the transcendence of the world system of form or the transcendence of the world system of formlessness. If you ask why, it is because non-entities278 are non-apprehensible.

“Su­bhūti, past physical forms are empty of past physical forms. Future physical forms are empty of future physical forms. Present physical forms are empty of present physical forms. Similarly, past feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness [F.147.a] are empty of past consciousness, [and so forth]. Future consciousness is empty of future consciousness. Present consciousness is empty of present consciousness.

“Su­bhūti, in emptiness, past physical forms are non-apprehensible. The past itself is emptiness and this is non-apprehensible because emptiness is indeed emptiness. So how could past physical forms be apprehended in emptiness? In emptiness, future and present physical forms are non-apprehensible. They are non-apprehensible because emptiness is indeed emptiness. So how could future and present physical forms be apprehended in emptiness?

“In emptiness, past feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness are non-apprehensible. They are non-apprehensible because emptiness is indeed emptiness. So how could past feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness be apprehended in emptiness? In emptiness, future and present feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness are non-apprehensible. They are non-apprehensible because emptiness is indeed emptiness. So how could future and present feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions and consciousness be apprehended in emptiness?

“Similarly, Su­bhūti, the transcendent perfection of generosity does not apprehend the limit of past time. Likewise, the transcendent perfection of generosity does not apprehend the limit of future time, nor the present. Su­bhūti, the transcendent perfection of generosity does not apprehend the sameness of the three times. Su­bhūti, in the sameness of things, past time is non-apprehensible, nor are the future and the present apprehensible. Su­bhūti, sameness does not apprehend sameness, even provisionally.279 [F.147.b] So how could past time be apprehended in sameness! Similarly, how could future and present time be apprehended?

“Su­bhūti, the same refrain should be extensively applied also to the transcendent perfection of ethical discipline, the transcendent perfection of tolerance, the transcendent perfection of perseverance, the transcendent perfection of meditative concentration, and the transcendent perfection of wisdom, just as in the case of the transcendent perfection of generosity.

“Moreover, Su­bhūti, the applications of mindfulness do not apprehend the limit of past time. Similarly, the applications of mindfulness do not apprehend the limit of future time, nor the present. The applications of mindfulness do not apprehend the sameness of the three times. In the same vein, [the other causal attributes], up to and including the noble eightfold path, do not apprehend the limit of past time. Similarly, the noble eightfold path [and so forth] do not apprehend the limit of future time, nor the present. The noble eightfold path [and so forth] do not apprehend the sameness of the three times. Similarly, Su­bhūti, the ten powers of the tathāgatas do not apprehend the limit of past time. Similarly, the ten powers of the tathāgatas do not apprehend the limit of future time, nor the present. In the same vein, [the other fruitional attributes], up to and including the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas, do not apprehend the limit of past time. Similarly, the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas [and so forth] do not apprehend the limit of future time, nor the present. The eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas [and so forth] do not apprehend the sameness of the three times.

“Moreover, Su­bhūti, ordinary people do not apprehend the limit of past time. Similarly, ordinary people do not apprehend the limit of future time, or the present. Ordinary people do not apprehend the sameness of the three times. If you ask why, it is owing to the non-apprehension of sentient beings. In the same vein, śrāvakas do not apprehend the limit of past time. Śrāvakas do not apprehend the limit of future time. [F.148.a] Śrāvakas do not apprehend the present. Similarly, śrāvakas do not apprehend the sameness of the three times. If you ask why, it is owing to the non-apprehension of sentient beings. Similarly, the pratyekabuddhas, and likewise the bodhisattvas and the tathāgatas, arhats, genuinely perfect buddhas do not apprehend the limit of past time. The tathāgatas, arhats, genuinely perfect buddhas [and so forth] do not apprehend the limit of future time, nor the present time. Similarly, the tathāgatas, and so forth, do not apprehend the sameness of the three times. If you ask why, it is owing to the non-apprehension of sentient beings.

“So it is, Su­bhūti, that great bodhisattva beings who practice the transcendent perfection of wisdom, having trained accordingly with respect to the three times, should perfect omniscience. Su­bhūti, this is the Great Vehicle of great bodhisattva beings, designated as the sameness of the three times. Abiding therein, great bodhisattva beings overpower the world with its gods, humans, and antigods, and they attain emancipation in omniscience.” [B14]

Then the venerable Su­bhūti said to the Blessed One, “Reverend Lord! Well indeed has the Lord taught the Great Vehicle of great bodhisattva beings! Reverend Lord! Great bodhisattva beings of the past, who have trained in this supreme vehicle, have attained omniscience. Reverend Lord! Great bodhisattva beings of the future, also, having trained in this supreme vehicle, the Great Vehicle, will acquire omniscience. [F.148.b] Reverend Lord! Great bodhisattva beings of the present who are limitless in number, [residing] in the innumerable, countless, and limitless world systems of the ten directions, having trained in this supreme vehicle, the Great Vehicle, currently acquire omniscience. Reverend Lord! That is why this is the Great Vehicle of great bodhisattva beings.”

The Blessed One then replied to the venerable Su­bhūti, “Su­bhūti, that is so! Su­bhūti, that is so! It is as you have said. Su­bhūti, great bodhisattva beings of the past who have trained in this Great Vehicle have attained omniscience. The tathāgatas, arhats, genuinely perfect buddhas who will appear in the future, also, having trained in this Great Vehicle, will acquire omniscience. The innumerable tathāgatas, arhats, genuinely perfect buddhas who are alive at present, residing in the innumerable, countless, and limitless worlds of the ten directions, also, having trained in this Great Vehicle, now acquire omniscience.”

Then the venerable Śāradvatī­putra asked the venerable Su­bhūti as follows: “Venerable Su­bhūti, when great bodhisattva beings practice the transcendent perfection of wisdom, how do they investigate these phenomena? Venerable Su­bhūti, what is a great bodhisattva being? What is the transcendent perfection of wisdom? What is their investigation?”

The venerable Su­bhūti replied to the venerable Śāradvatī­putra as follows: [F.149.a] “Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, you ask what is a bodhisattva. The term ‘bodhisattva’ designates one who is simply an enlightened being. On the basis of enlightenment, such beings know the modalities of all things, but they are not at all fixated on those phenomena.”

“What are the modalities of all things that they know‍—the phenomena on which they are not fixated?”280

“They know the modality of physical forms, and yet they are without fixation in that respect. Similarly, they know the modalities of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness, and yet they are without fixation on them. In the same vein, as before, they know the modalities of [other phenomena], up to and including the sense fields, and yet they are without fixation on them. Similarly, they know the modalities of the sensory elements, and yet they are without fixation on them. Similarly, they know the modalities of the applications of mindfulness, and yet they are without fixation on them. In the same vein, they know the modalities of [the other causal attributes], up to and including the noble eightfold path, and likewise, of the ten powers of the tathāgatas, and in the same vein, of all [the other fruitional attributes], up to and including the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas, and yet they are without fixation on them.”

“Venerable Su­bhūti, what constitutes the modalities of all things that great bodhisattva beings know‍—the things on which they are not fixated?”

“Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, the modalities, indications, and signs whereby phenomena are grasped‍—that is to say the sights, sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, mental phenomena, external and internal attributes, and so forth, through which conditioned and unconditioned things are grasped‍—constitute the modalities that they definitively know.

“Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, you also asked what is the transcendent perfection of wisdom. [F.149.b] It is the intelligence that is far removed. This is why it is called the ‘transcendent perfection of wisdom.’”281

“From what is it far removed?”

“Śāradvatī­putra, it is far removed from the psycho-physical aggregates, the sensory elements, and the sense fields. It is far removed from all afflicted mental states and opinions. It is far removed from the six classes of living beings. This is why it is called the ‘transcendent perfection of wisdom.’ It is far removed from the transcendent perfection of generosity, and from the transcendent perfections of ethical discipline, tolerance, perseverance, and meditative concentration. It is far removed from the transcendent perfection of wisdom. This is why it is called the ‘transcendent perfection of wisdom.’

“Similarly, it is far removed from the emptiness of internal phenomena, and it is far removed from the other aspects of emptiness, up to and including the emptiness of the essential nature of non-entities. This is why it is called the ‘transcendent perfection of wisdom.’

“It is far removed from the applications of mindfulness and [the other causal attributes], up to and including the noble eightfold path, and from the ten powers of the tathāgatas and [the other fruitional attributes], up to and including the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas. This is why it is called the ‘transcendent perfection of wisdom.’

“It is far removed from the understanding of all phenomena, from the understanding of the aspects of the path, and from omniscience. This is why it is called the ‘transcendent perfection of wisdom.’

“Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, for these reasons it is far removed. This is why it is called the ‘transcendent perfection of wisdom.’

“Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, you also asked what constitutes investigation. Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, in this context, when great bodhisattva beings practice the transcendent perfection of wisdom, they do not investigate the notion that physical forms are imbued with happiness. Nor do they investigate the notions that physical forms are imbued with suffering, or that they are not imbued with suffering, or indeed that they are not imbued with happiness, or that they are permanent or impermanent. In the same vein, as mentioned previously, [F.150.a] they do not investigate the notions that physical forms are a self or not a self, empty or not empty, with signs or signless, having aspirations or lacking aspirations, calm or not calm, void or not void, and so on. Similarly, they do not investigate the notions that feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness are a self; in the same vein they do not investigate [those other notions], including the notions that these are void or not void.

“The same refrain should be applied to the transcendent perfection of generosity, and also it should be applied to the other transcendent perfections, up to and including the transcendent perfection of wisdom. Similarly, it should be applied to the emptiness of internal phenomena and to the other aspects of emptiness, up to and including the emptiness of the essential nature of non-entities. Similarly, it should be applied to the applications of mindfulness and to [the other causal attributes], up to and including the noble eightfold path, and to the ten powers of the tathāgatas and [the other fruitional attributes], up to and including the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas. Similarly, it should be applied to all phenomena, and in the same way it should be applied to all the gateways of meditative stability and to all the gateways of dhāraṇī.

“Similarly, they do not investigate the notions that omniscience is permanent or impermanent, and similarly, the notions that it is imbued with happiness or suffering, that it is not imbued with suffering or happiness, that it is a self or not a self, that it is empty or not empty, that it is with signs or signless, that it is having aspirations or lacking aspirations, that it is calm or not calm, and that it is void or not void. Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, when great bodhisattva beings practice the transcendent perfection of wisdom, they investigate all things in that manner.”

Then, the venerable Śāradvatī­putra addressed the venerable Su­bhūti as follows: “Venerable Su­bhūti, why do you say that the non-arising of physical forms is not physical form, and that the non-arising of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, [F.150.b] and consciousness are not consciousness [and so forth]? Similarly, why do you say that the non-arising of [all things], up to and including omniscience, is not omniscience [and so forth]?”

The venerable Su­bhūti then replied to the venerable Śāradvatī­putra as follows: “Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, physical forms are empty of physical forms. Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, the emptiness of physical forms is not physical forms, and nor is there arising of physical forms. For these reasons, Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, the non-arising of physical forms is not physical forms. Similarly, feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness are empty of consciousness [and the other aggregates]. Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, the emptiness [of these aggregates] is not consciousness [and so forth], and nor is there arising of consciousness [and so forth]. For these reasons, Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, the non-arising of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness is not consciousness [and the other aggregates].

“Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, the transcendent perfection of generosity is empty of the transcendent perfection of generosity. Emptiness is not the transcendent perfection of generosity‍—there is no arising. In the same vein, as before, the transcendent perfection of ethical discipline, the transcendent perfection of tolerance, the transcendent perfection of perseverance, the transcendent perfection of meditative concentration, and the transcendent perfection of wisdom are empty of the transcendent perfection of wisdom [and so forth]. Emptiness is not the transcendent perfection of wisdom [and so forth]‍—there is no arising. For these reasons, Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, the non-arising of the transcendent perfection of wisdom is not the transcendent perfection of wisdom. The same refrain should be also extensively applied, as before, to the emptiness of internal phenomena [and so forth].

“For these reasons, Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, the non-arising of physical forms [F.151.a] is not physical forms‍—indeed there is no arising. Similarly, the non-arising of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness is not consciousness [and the other aggregates]‍—indeed there is no arising. Similarly, the non-arising of [all other attributes and attainments], up to and including omniscience, is not omniscience [and the rest]‍—indeed there is no arising.”

Then the venerable Śāradvatī­putra addressed the venerable Su­bhūti as follows: “Venerable Su­bhūti, why do you say that the imperishability282 of physical forms is not physical forms. Similarly, why do you say that the imperishability of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness is not consciousness [and the other aggregates]? In the same vein, why do you say that the imperishability of [all other attributes and attainments], up to and including omniscience, is not omniscience [and the rest]?”

The venerable Su­bhūti then replied to the venerable Śāradvatī­putra as follows: “Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, all things that are imperishable, that constitute physical forms, and that are without duality are neither conjoined nor disjoined, and they share a single defining characteristic in that they are all immaterial, unrevealed, unimpeded, and without defining characteristics. Similarly, all those things that are imperishable, that constitute feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness, and that are without duality are neither conjoined nor disjoined, and they share a single defining characteristic in that they are all immaterial, unrevealed, unimpeded, and without defining characteristics. The same refrain should also be applied to the sensory elements and sense fields, exactly as indicated here in the context of the psycho-physical aggregates. Similarly, it should be extensively applied to [all the other attributes and attainments] as well, up to and including omniscience. [F.151.b]

“For these reasons, Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, the imperishability of physical forms is not physical forms. Similarly, the imperishability of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness is not consciousness [and the other aggregates]. Similarly, the imperishability of [all attributes and attainments], up to and including omniscience, is not omniscience [and the rest].”

Then, the venerable Śāradvatī­putra addressed the venerable Su­bhūti as follows: “Venerable Su­bhūti, why do you say that that which is termed ‘physical forms’ is to be counted as imperishable? In the same vein, why do you say that [all attributes and attainments], up to and including that which is termed ‘omniscience,’ are to be counted as imperishable?”283

The venerable Su­bhūti replied to the venerable Śāradvatī­putra, “Physical forms are not one thing, and non-arising another. The nature of non-arising is indeed physical forms. The nature of physical forms is indeed non-arising. Similarly, feelings, too, are not one thing, perceptions are not one thing, formative predispositions are not one thing, consciousness is not one thing, and non-arising another, [distinct from these]. The nature of consciousness is indeed non-arising. The nature of non-arising is indeed consciousness. For these reasons, Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, that which is termed ‘physical forms’ is to be counted as imperishable. Similarly, that which is termed ‘feelings,’ ‘perceptions,’ and ‘formative predispositions,’ and that which is termed ‘consciousness’ are to be counted as imperishable.

“In the same vein, as before, [F.152.a] Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, omniscience is not one thing, and non-arising another. The nature of non-arising is indeed omniscience. The nature of omniscience is indeed non-arising. For these reasons, Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, that which is termed ‘omniscience’ is to be counted as imperishable.”

Then the venerable Su­bhūti said to the Blessed One, “Reverend Lord! Furthermore, when great bodhisattva beings who practice the transcendent perfection of wisdom are engaged in the investigation of these phenomena, owing to their utter purity they do consider the non-arising of physical forms. Similarly, owing to their utter purity, they do consider the non-arising of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness. Similarly, owing to their utter purity, they do consider the non-arising of a self. In the same vein, owing to their utter purity, they do consider the non-arising of [other postulated subjects], up to and including knowers and viewers. Similarly, owing to their utter purity, they do consider the non-arising of [the transcendent perfections], from the transcendent perfection of generosity up to the transcendent perfection of wisdom. Similarly, owing to their utter purity, they do consider the non-arising of the applications of mindfulness. Similarly, owing to their utter purity, they do consider the non-arising of [the other causal attributes], up to and including the noble eightfold path. Similarly, owing to their utter purity, they do consider the non-arising of the ten powers of the tathāgatas, and owing to their utter purity, [F.152.b] they do consider the non-arising of [the other fruitional attributes, up to and including] the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas. Similarly, owing to their utter purity, they do consider the non-arising of all the meditative stabilities and all the dhāraṇī gateways. Owing to their utter purity, they do consider the non-arising of [the other fruitional states], up to and including omniscience. Similarly, owing to their utter purity, they do consider the non-arising of the attributes of ordinary people. Owing to their utter purity, they do consider the non-arising of ordinary people themselves. Similarly, owing to their utter purity, they do consider the non-arising of the attributes of those who have entered the stream, as well as those individuals who have entered the stream, the attributes of those tied to one further rebirth, those individuals who are tied to one further rebirth, the attributes of those who are no longer subject to rebirth, those individuals who are no longer subject to rebirth, the attributes of the arhats, the arhats themselves, the attributes of the pratyekabuddhas, the pratyekabuddhas themselves, the attributes of the bodhisattvas, the bodhisattvas themselves, the attributes of the buddhas, and the buddhas themselves. Owing to their utter purity, they do consider the non-arising of the genuinely perfect buddhas.”

Then the venerable Śāradvatī­putra addressed the venerable Su­bhūti as follows: “Venerable Su­bhūti, as I understand the meaning of your words, physical forms are non-arising. Similarly, feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness are non-arising. In the same vein, [all attributes], up to and including enlightenment, are non-arising. Even the attributes of the buddhas are non-arising. If that were so, those who enter the stream would already have attained the fruit of entering the stream, [F.153.a] and also arhats would have already attained arhatship. Similarly, those who follow the vehicle of the pratyekabuddhas would have already attained their individual enlightenment. Also, great bodhisattva beings would have absolutely attained omniscience. The five classes of living beings would not even be differentiated. Great bodhisattva beings would have absolutely attained the five degrees of enlightenment, even though they are without insight.284

“Venerable Su­bhūti, if all things were non-arising, why should those who seek the fruit of having entered the stream cultivate the path in order to abandon the three fetters?285 Why should those who seek the fruit of being tied to only one more rebirth cultivate the path in order to abandon desire, hatred, and delusion? Why should those who seek the fruit of no longer being subject to rebirth cultivate the path in order to abandon the five fetters associated with the lower realms? Why should those who seek the fruit of arhatship cultivate the path in order to abandon the five fetters associated with the higher realms?286 Why should [pratyekabuddhas] cultivate the path of individual enlightenment, according to which all formative predispositions are dependently originated? Again, why should great bodhisattva beings practice austerity and undergo myriad sufferings for the sake of sentient beings? Why should the tathāgatas attain manifestly perfect buddhahood in unsurpassed and genuinely perfect enlightenment? Why should the tathāgatas turn the wheel of the sacred doctrine?”

The venerable Su­bhūti then replied to the venerable Śāradvatī­putra as follows: “Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, I do not hold that [attainments] are designated with respect to things that are non-arising.287 I do not hold that stream-entry and the fruit of stream-entry are found in non-arising. Similarly, I do not hold that arhatship and the fruit of arhatship are found in non-arising. [F.153.b] I do not hold that [the status of] a pratyekabuddha and [the fruit of] individual enlightenment are found in non-arising.

“Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, bodhisattvas do not engage in the practice of austerity with the perception of hardship. If you ask why, Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, it is because when the perception of hardship is developed, it will not be possible to act for the benefit of innumerable, countless sentient beings. On the contrary, Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, once great bodhisattva beings have developed, without apprehending anything, the perception of sentient beings as their father, the perception [of sentient beings] as their mother, the perception [of sentient beings] as their child, and the perception [of sentient beings] as themselves, they should develop the mind of unsurpassed, genuinely perfect enlightenment. Just as the notion of individual selves is entirely non-existent in all respects and is non-apprehensible, in that same manner they should develop this perception with regard to all inner and outer phenomena. If they develop their perceptions in that manner, the notion of hardship will not arise. If you ask why, it is because, in all respects, in each and every way, they neither acquire nor do they apprehend all these phenomena.

“Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, I do not hold that the tathāgatas are found in non-arising. I do not hold that the unsurpassed, genuinely perfect buddhas are found in non-arising, nor do I hold that the tathāgatas turn the wheel of the sacred doctrine [therein]. There is nothing at all that will be attained on the basis of things that are non-arising.”

Then, the venerable Śāradvatī­putra addressed the venerable Su­bhūti as follows: “Venerable Su­bhūti, do you hold that attainment will ensue on the basis of things that are non-arising, or else do you hold that something will be attained on the basis of things that are arising?”

“Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, I do not hold that attainment will ensue on the basis of things that are non-arising nor do I hold that anything will be attained on the basis of things that are arising.”

“Venerable Su­bhūti, is there no attainment? Is there no clear realization?” [F.154.a]

“Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, there is attainment and there is clear realization, but not in terms of duality. Yet, Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, attainment and clear realization refer to worldly conventions. Similarly, those who enter the stream are also designated according to worldly convention. Similarly, [the other realized beings], including arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and the unsurpassed, genuinely perfect buddhas, too, are designated on the basis of worldly convention. But, ultimately, there is no attainment. There is no clear realization either, and there are no [realized beings], up to and including genuinely perfect buddhas.”

“Venerable Su­bhūti, as attainment and clear realization are exclusively designated according to worldly convention, is it the case that the five classes of living beings are also differentiated owing to worldly convention but not in ultimate reality?”

“Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, that is so! Just as attainment and clear realization are exclusively designated according to worldly convention, it is the case that the five classes of living beings also are differentiated owing to worldly convention but not in ultimate reality. If you ask why, Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, in ultimate reality there are no past actions, no ripening, no affliction, and no purification.”

Then, the venerable Śāradvatī­putra addressed the venerable Su­bhūti as follows: “Venerable Su­bhūti, do non-arising things arise; or else, does arising itself arise?”

“Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, I do not hold that non-arising things arise.”

“Venerable Su­bhūti, what non-arising things do you not hold to arise?”

“Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, I do not hold the emptiness of the essential nature with respect to non-arising physical forms to arise. Similarly, I do not hold the emptiness of the essential nature with respect to unarisen feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness to arise. Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, in the same vein, I [F.154.b] do not hold the emptiness of the essential nature288 with respect to [any other] non-arising [attributes], up to and including enlightenment, to arise.”

“Venerable Su­bhūti, does arising arise; or else, does non-arising arise?”

“Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, arising does not arise, nor does non-arising arise. If you ask why, Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, it is because both things that arise and things that are non-arising are neither conjoined nor disjoined, and they share a single defining characteristic in that they are all immaterial, unrevealed, unimpeded, and without defining characteristics. For these reasons, Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, arising does not arise, nor does non-arising arise.”

Then the venerable Śāradvatī­putra addressed the venerable Su­bhūti as follows: “Venerable Su­bhūti, are you inspired to say that things are non-arising, that things are indeed non-arising? Venerable Su­bhūti, are you inspired to say that the statement ‘things are non-arising, things are indeed non-arising’ is itself non-arising?”289

The venerable Su­bhūti then replied to the venerable Śāradvatī­putra as follows: “Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, I am inspired to say that things are non-arising, that things are indeed non-arising. Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, I am also inspired to say that the statement ‘things are non-arising, things are indeed non-arising’ is itself non-arising. If you ask why, Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, it is because the non-arising [of these statements], the act of inspired eloquence, the statements that are expressed, and the things that do not arise are all neither conjoined nor disjoined, and they share a single defining characteristic in that they are all immaterial, unrevealed, unimpeded, and without defining characteristics.”

Then the venerable Śāradvatī­putra addressed the venerable Su­bhūti as follows: “Venerable Su­bhūti, is it then the case that those things are indeed non-arising, that the act of inspired eloquence is also non-arising, that those statements are also non-arising, [F.155.a] and that those comments of yours, commencing therefrom, are also non-arising?”

“Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, it is so! It is just as you have spoken! These things are indeed non-arising. The act of inspired eloquence too is non-arising. Those statements too are non-arising, and the things that I was inspired to say, commencing therefrom, are also non-arising! If you ask why, Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, it is because physical forms are non-arising. Similarly, feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness are non-arising. Similarly, the eyes are non-arising, and [all other sense organs], up to and including the mental faculty, are non-arising. Similarly, the earth element is non-arising, and [all other elements], up to and including the element of consciousness, are non-arising. The formative predispositions of the body are non-arising. Similarly, the formative predispositions of speech and the formative predispositions of mind are non-arising. In the same vein, [all other attributes and attainments], up to and including omniscience, are non-arising. Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, for these reasons, these [aforementioned] statements are indeed non-arising. The one who is inspired too is non-arising, and those things that I was inspired to say, commencing therefrom, are also non-arising!”

Then the venerable Śāradvatī­putra addressed the venerable Su­bhūti as follows: “Venerable Su­bhūti, you should be established as supreme among those who teach the sacred doctrine! If you ask why, Venerable Su­bhūti, it is because however you are questioned, you elaborate precisely, in the correct manner!”

“It is as you have spoken because all things are without support!”

Then, the venerable Śāradvatī­putra again addressed the venerable Su­bhūti as follows: “Venerable Su­bhūti, what are all the things that are without support?”

The venerable Su­bhūti replied, “Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, physical forms, being empty of inherent existence, are internally without support, and also they are externally without support, and nor do they have any support in between those two. [F.155.b] Similarly, Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness, being empty of inherent existence, are internally without support, and also they are externally without support, and nor do they have any support in between those two. In the same vein, as before, the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the body, and the mental faculty, being empty of inherent existence, are internally without support, and also they are externally without support, and nor do they have any support in between those two. Similarly, sights, sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena, being empty of inherent existence, are internally without support, and also they are externally without support, and nor do they have any support in between those two.

“Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, likewise the transcendent perfection of generosity, being empty of inherent existence, is internally without support, and also it is externally without support, and nor does it have any support in between those two. Similarly, the transcendent perfections of ethical discipline, tolerance, perseverance, meditative concentration, and likewise, wisdom, being empty of inherent existence, are internally without support, and also they are externally without support, and nor do they have any support in between those two.

“Similarly, [the eighteen aspects of emptiness], from the emptiness of internal phenomena, up to an including the emptiness of the essential nature of non-entities, being empty of inherent existence, are internally without support, and also they are externally without support, nor do they have any support in between those two.

“Similarly, the applications of mindfulness, being empty of inherent existence, are internally without support and they are also externally without support, nor do they have any support in between those two. Similarly [the other causal and fruitional attributes], up to and including the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas, being empty of inherent existence, are internally without support, and also they are externally without support, nor do they have any support in between those two.

“Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, for these reasons all things are without support because they are empty of inherent existence. Venerable Śāradvatī­putra, it is in this way that great bodhisattva beings who practice the transcendent perfection of wisdom should refine physical forms, [F.156.a] and similarly, refine feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness. In the same vein, [it is in this way that] they should refine [all attributes and attainments], up to and including omniscience.”