The Long Explanation of the Noble Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand, Twenty-Five Thousand, and Eighteen Thousand Lines
Explanation of the Detailed Teaching
Imprint
Translated by Gareth Sparham
under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha
First published 2022
Current version v 1.4.1 (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 Long Explanation of the Noble Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand, Twenty-Five Thousand, and Eighteen Thousand Lines is a detailed explanation of the Long Perfection of Wisdom sūtras, presenting a structural framework for them that is relatively easy to understand in comparison to most other commentaries based on Maitreya-Asaṅga’s Ornament for the Clear Realizations. After a detailed, word-by-word explanation of the introductory chapter common to all three sūtras, it explains the structure they also all share in terms of the three approaches or “gateways”—brief, intermediate, and detailed—ending with an explanation of the passage known as the “Maitreya chapter” found only in the Eighteen Thousand Line and Twenty-Five Thousand Line sūtras. It goes by many different titles, and its authorship has never been conclusively determined, some Tibetans believing it to be by Vasubandhu, and others that it is by Daṃṣṭrāsena.
Acknowledgements
This commentary was translated by Gareth Sparham under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
The Translator’s Acknowledgments
I thank the late Gene Smith, who initially encouraged me to undertake this work, and I thank all of those at 84000—Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche, the sponsors, and the scholars, translators, editors, and technicians—and all the other indispensable people whose work has made this translation possible.
I thank all the faculty and graduate students in the Group in Buddhist Studies at Berkeley, and Jan Nattier, whose seminars on the Perfection of Wisdom were particularly helpful. At an early stage, Paul Harrison and Ulrich Pagel arranged for me to see a copy of an unpublished Sanskrit manuscript of a sūtra cited in Bṭ3. I thank them for that assistance.
I also take this opportunity to thank the abbot of Drepung Gomang monastery, Losang Gyaltsen, and the retired director of the Institute of Buddhist Dialectics, Kalsang Damdul, for listening to some of my questions and giving learned and insightful responses.
Finally, I acknowledge the kindness of my mother, Ann Sparham, who recently passed away in her one hundredth year, and my wife Janet Seding.
Acknowledgement of Sponsorhip
We gratefully acknowledge the generous sponsorship of Kelvin Lee, Doris Lim, Chang Chen Hsien, Lim Cheng Cheng, Ng Ah Chon and family, Lee Hoi Lang and family, the late Lee Tiang Chuan, and the late Chang Koo Cheng. Their support has helped make the work on this translation possible.
Text Body
Explanation of the Detailed Teaching
Part One
Explanation of Chapters 22 and 23
Thus, first of all, along with a teaching of miraculous powers and along with a teaching of the results, the intermediate explanation of the perfection of wisdom has been completed. As explained,1078 the Tathāgata in this perfection of wisdom1079 gives a threefold teaching: brief, middling, and detailed. Of them, the teaching in brief and middling modes based on trainees is finished.
From here on, having brought unmatured trainees to maturity by removing doubts that have arisen, a detailed teaching in two parts, divided into the conventional and ultimate modes, causes those who have been brought to maturity to realize the meaning of true reality.
Then,
“all the Four Mahārājas stationed in the great billion world systems together with many hundreds of thousands of one hundred million billion gods were assembled in that very retinue,” P18k P25k P100k
and so on. Why is it also teaching that they are all assembled on the occasion of a discourse powered by the Tathāgata?
You should know that this teaching of the perfection of wisdom is unprecedented, so there has to be a brief teaching about the retinue assembling, as a prior indicator that there is going to be an unprecedented teaching of the Dharma. Also, the show of light where he demonstrates emitting light rays and arraying light is done as a prior indicator that there is going to be an explanation of the Dharma.
Why does the chief of the gods not address his questions to the Tathāgata? Why does he ask the elder Subhūti?
At that time, those in the retinue are to be trained by an explanation by a śrāvaka, so, by way of asking him, they also have asked the Tathāgata.
“How should bodhisattva great beings stand in the perfection of wisdom? What is the bodhisattva great beings’ [F.174.a] perfection of wisdom? And how should bodhisattva great beings train in the perfection of wisdom?”1080 P18k P25k P100k
The answers to these three questions are explained below.
What is the bodhisattva great beings’ perfection of wisdom?
There, previously, taking the knowledge of all aspects as the point of departure, it gave a middle-length explanation based on the nonconceptual perfection of wisdom. Here, taking the knowledge of path aspects as the point of departure, it teaches the conceptual and nonconceptual perfection of wisdom that is the practice of bodhisattvas.
“Those who have entered into flawlessness are incapable of producing the thought of unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening.”1081 P18k P25k P100k
Take this as saying that those fixed in a state of error are, for the time being, without good fortune.
“And yet if they also produce the thought of unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening I still rejoice in them also.” P18k P25k P100k
If they hear this explanation it will not be in vain, because a scripture says, “On the other side of infinite, countless thousands of hundreds of one hundred million billion eons they will enter into buddhahood.”
“Kauśika, what is the bodhisattva great beings’ perfection of wisdom?” P18k P25k
and so on. This is the middle of the three questions but is being taught here first because if it is taught thus, it is easier to understand.
Even though it is true that this perfection of wisdom is the all-knowledge side for the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha levels and the knowledge of path aspects side for the bodhisattva levels, here in this knowledge of path aspects that has to be taught to a bodhisattva who wants to attain the knowledge of all aspects there are both.
There, in regard to the all-knowledge side, you should know that
“Kauśika, here bodhisattva great beings with a thought of awakening connected with the knowledge of all aspects should pay attention to form [F.174.b] as impermanent, and they should pay attention to it as suffering, selfless, empty, a disease, a boil,” P18k P25k
and so on, is an explanation teaching the fifteen attentions,1082 and is teaching the seven attentions focused on the cessation of dependent origination.1083
In regard to the knowledge of path aspects side, it teaches that, with the nonapprehending attentions to the
up to
“the distinct attributes,” P25k
and with
“putting one part of the picture together with the other parts,” P18k
and so on.
Among these, I will explain the words “impermanent” and so on, in the way they are on the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha levels.
because what has not come into being comes into being, and what has come into being becomes nonexistent. They are
because they have as their nature the three sufferings and because they become a cause for the suffering of others. They are
because, since they are without any agency and so on, they do not have their own defining mark. They are
like the trunk1086 of a plantain tree because they are hollow inside, and hence empty of an inner self. They are a
because like a disease they require many conditions for a cure and are the root of physical and mental suffering. They are a
because like a boil they oppress with obsession, drip with the pus of the afflictions, and gradually swell up, ripen, and burst with birth, old age, and death. They are a
because like a thorn they pierce with inner and outer trouble and are hard to treat. They are a
because like the wicked they are to be criticized and they become oppressive. They are
because they labor in the face of conditions and they labor in the work of ‘making it mine,’ so they have no agency except from others. They are
because
they are thoroughly destroyed by sickness, old age, and death. They are
because they have the three marks of a compounded phenomenon and have the eight fickle worldly dharmas. [F.175.a] They are
because it is in their inner nature to be destroyed and because they are destroyed by something harming them. They are
because “the absence of hazards”1087 is peace, is pleasure, and is the antidote, and they are the cause of all fears. They are
because even when they are not felt, they persecute in various harmful ways. They are
because they hurt in many ways like a nagging demon1088 and a headache.
As for
and so on, construe them as “selfless” because they are devoid of the mark of a self; “calm” because all suffering is calmed;
because they are without afflictions;
because they are endowed with the emptiness of a self and what belongs to a self;
because they are without all the causal signs of compounded phenomena;
because they do not wish for anything in the three realms; and a
because karma does not bring anything about later.
and so on—“putting together” is paying attention to the thought of awakening, the thought of the wholesome root, and the thought of dedication touching each other. They
when they pay attention to all three not having the other’s intrinsic nature as its own intrinsic nature. They
when they pay attention to the meaning that has already been explained that all three are “inconceivable because they are not thought, not thought because they are inconceivable.”1090
is the
completely. This is the fourth detailed and thorough analysis of all the dharmas as selfless.
“The bodhisattva great beings’ thought of the wholesome roots is not touched by the thought of awakening.” P18k P25k
What does this teach?
Earlier bodhisattvas, having made a dedication in general with conventional attention—”I dedicate these wholesome roots [F.175.b] to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening”—after having made an examination in the ultimate mode, since the thought of the wholesome root, the thought of awakening, and the thought of dedication do not touch1092 each other, they examine whether, since they do not touch, dedication exists or not.
Here some say the thoughts have not touched, but still a specific volitional factor produced through the force of an earlier thought, simultaneous with the later thought, does touch, so all the volitional factors become complete in the final thought of all. In this way, therefore, thoughts have touched.
To eliminate that, it says
“the thought of the wholesome roots does not exist… in the thought of awakening,”1093 P18k P25k
and so on. It means that thought is not in the other thought, by way of a volitional factor left as a residual impression and so on. It says this because having thus taught that the actual thought does not exist, there is no volitional factor left as a residual impression and so on, like an entity that is the sharpness or dullness of a rabbit’s horn.
Having thus investigated and found that it does not exist in the intrinsic nature of the others, they also investigate and find that it does not exist in its own intrinsic nature:
“the thought of the wholesome roots does not exist in the thought of the wholesome roots, the thought of awakening does not exist in the thought of awakening,” P18k
and so on. This is because when it is seen as just suchness there is no such investigation.
and so on, teaches that it is just mere suchness. From the perspective of its own true dharmic nature, thought is free from falsely imagined thought so the intrinsic nature that is the nonexistence of thought comes to be known as the true dharmic nature of thought.
“A nonexistent thought does not touch a nonexistent thought,”
and so on.1095 This is teaching that other than what comes to be known as the true dharmic nature of thought, no touching or existing or dedication comes to be known in any way at all. At that time [F.176.a] it is a self-reflexive analytic knowledge beyond the path of the conceivable, hence it is
and is
“Kauśika, this is the bodhisattva great beings’ perfection of wisdom” P18k P25k
means it is nonconceptual wisdom that has gone to the other side.
Thus, conventionally they are “analytically investigating all phenomena,” but ultimately “not settling down on and not apprehending any phenomenon.”
What does
teach? It teaches that earlier when our Lord was in the form of a bodhisattva, the great śrāvakas in the retinue of earlier tathāgatas taught him with advice and instruction, inspiring him to take it up, and inspiring him to perfectly practice what he had found. Having gradually accomplished their teaching he became completely awakened. Therefore, they too, by advising and instructing these bodhisattvas in this retinue, will establish them in perfect practice. When they have gradually accomplished that earlier teaching, they will become completely awakened. Therefore, I should show appreciation to the earlier śrāvakas.
What is the difference between the words
and so on? Here there are the three periods: starting, middle, and end. At the start they have to be “advised and instructed.” In the middle there is practice, and at the end the result.
There during the starting period “advice” is saying, “Do not do this,” preventing them from doing what they should not do. “Instruction” is saying, “Do this,” connecting them with the activities.
In the middle there are four periods: not practicing, practicing incorrectly, practicing a bit, and practicing perfectly.
“taught.” P18k
Those who have set out incorrectly because of incorrect knowledge are connected with a perfect practice when they are
“made to take them up.” P18k
Those who, because of the fault of laziness and so on, practice a bit, become inspired to try to persevere when they are
Having rejoiced, saying “excellent” to those who have set out perfectly with wisdom, they are connected with true reality when they are
At the end, they are
in the result. Construe them like that.
How should bodhisattva great beings stand in the perfection of wisdom?
After that, in reference to the question, ‘How should they stand?’ it teaches1096 that they should forsake where
and, standing where they should stand, they
“should stand in the perfection of wisdom.” P18k P25k
and so on, teaches that the realization of emptiness is where they stand.
is where they should not stand. Therefore, this teaches that because these falsely imagined phenomena, form and so on, do not exist through the intrinsic nature of form and so on, bodhisattvas also do not exist through the intrinsic nature of a bodhisattva, and their emptinesses are not different, they are one. Therefore, form and so on in its true dharmic nature is a thoroughly established phenomenon, and a bodhisattva furthermore is
so to stand in their same true dharmic nature is to stand in the perfection of wisdom.
In the section of the text explaining where not to stand, furthermore, the teaching is in three parts. First they should not stand in the dharmas; second they should not stand in the true nature of dharmas; and third they should not stand as persons.
There, the section on the dharmas is again a teaching in two parts: teaching the dharmas and teaching the mark of the dharma.1098 From,1099
up to
is teaching the mark of the true nature of dharmas.
The section on the true nature of dharmas is again a teaching in three parts: teaching the true nature of dharmas on the side of all-knowing, teaching the true nature of dharmas on the side of the knowledge of path aspects, and teaching the true nature of dharmas on the side of the knowledge of all aspects.
Teaching the true nature of dharmas on the side of all-knowing is from1100
up to
“they should not dwell on the idea that the tathāgata, worthy one, perfectly complete buddha is worthy of gifts by way of apprehending something.” P18k P25k
Teaching the true nature of dharmas on the side of the knowledge of path aspects is from they1101
up to they
“should not dwell on the idea ‘I will establish infinite, countless beings beyond measure in unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening’ by way of apprehending something.” P18k P25k
Teaching the true nature of dharmas on the side of the knowledge of all aspects starts from1102
up to
“they should not dwell on the idea ‘I will make the eighty minor signs perfect on the body.’ ” P18k P25k
Again, construe the section teaching persons1103 in three parts, based on the all-knowledge side and so on. The dharmas where it says,1104
“I will, standing on the four legs of miraculous power, become completely absorbed in meditative stabilization,” P18k P25k
and so on, are on the side of the level of the knowledge of all aspects.
“Then it occurred to [him] to think, ‘Well then, however could bodhisattva great beings stand in the perfection of wisdom?’ ” [F.177.b] P18k P25k
He was thinking that it has said “they should not stand in all dharmas,” and that it has said it is not possible to stand in emptiness, hence “they should not stand” in it either. How could that be right?
Then the elder Subhūti establishes that they do not stand. The teaching that that is standing in the perfection of wisdom is
“the tathāgatas have totally nonabiding minds.”1105 P18k P25k
It is teaching that they stand in nonabiding nirvāṇa.
It has explained the achievement, standing without standing like that, and in the explanation based on those to be trained has said it is inexpressible. So those to be trained come to harbor doubts. Therefore, taking them as its point of departure, it sets the scene for another explanation with,
and so on, asking the gods the question, “Why have you not understood what has been said?” They then reply,
Then, because the perfection of wisdom is inexpressible, the elder says
teaching that since this is the case, the apparent talking and apparent hearing are falsely imagined phenomena, like a
thus making the gods happy.
is a magically created body of a tathāgata.
Because a falsely imagined form is a not real form, it “is not deep and is not subtle.” Again,
“it is because the intrinsic nature of form is not deep and is not subtle,” P18k P25k
and so on, teaches that because the true dharmic nature of form does not, in its intrinsic nature, move,1108 it “is not deep and is not subtle.” So here the section of the text is in two parts: the dharma section and the intrinsic nature section.
and so on. [F.178.a] The gods ask: if all dharmas are inexpressible, well then, is nothing “designated” or explained as “form”? Then the elder Subhūti says,
teaching that they are indeed not designated and not explained.
They
“cannot, without having resorted to this forbearance,”1110 P18k P25k
which is to say, to this explanation of the inexpressible.
This is teaching that if they are ultimately inexpressible there will be no speaker and no hearer, so there will be no listening to the Dharma.
and so on, teaches that ultimately a speaker and a hearer are nonexistent.
and so on—it is “deep” because it is hard to fathom; “hard to behold” because it is not an object of the five collections of consciousnesses;
because it is not an object of thinking-mind consciousness;
because all the afflictions and secondary afflictions have calmed down;
because up to1113 “all suffering” has calmed down;
because all conceptual thought constructions have calmed down;
because it is self-reflexive analytic knowledge;
because it transcends the path of thinking;
because it is the cause for brilliance in the realization of all dharmas as they really are;
because it is the supreme place for the realization of extraordinary dharmas; and
because it is not an object within the range of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, and it is not1114 an object to be known by the irreversible bodhisattvas. [F.178.b]
They
they will be those who take it up. With
“persons who have seen the truths, or worthy ones with outflows dried up,” P18k P25k
and so on, it first teaches those who are seeking conventionally. There, in the ultimate sense, bodhisattvas are spoken of as those “who have seen the truths”; when they are awakened, they are called “worthy ones.” Having taught them conventionally, those being taught ultimately are from1116
up to
This teaches that just those who have directly realized the nonconceptual perfection of wisdom are those who are seeking. Ultimately there is nothing they will have sought for, so they are not those who are seeking.
Then venerable Śāriputra says the assertion that a talker and a hearer are nonexistent contradicts scripture:1117
“Venerable Subhūti, is it not the case that in this perfection of wisdom the three vehicles… are taught in detail?” P18k P25k
and so on. The explanation of the three vehicles; and the teaching about
“the ten levels… the assistance,” P18k P25k
and
“the bodhisattva path” P18k P25k
of the perfections and so on; and about these dharmas: birth in the family of a tathāgata, sporting with
“the clairvoyances,” P18k P25k
hearing, not forgetting, being without distraction, and the sevenfold
and so on—he is saying ‘We ourselves have heard about these.’
After that, the elder Subhūti, to teach that the explanation of these dharmas is by way of not apprehending anything, to teach they do not exist ultimately and hence that even talking is mere illusion, says,1118
and so on. About the reason they are empty, it says1119
“because of inner emptiness,” P18k P25k
up to
“because of the emptiness that is the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature,” P18k P25k
and so on. [F.179.a]
It says the gods worship with flowers to teach the gods the sign of the emergence of the light of transcendental knowledge.1120 This is in order to set the scene for the thought that comes next,
and so on.
is saying that they are not marked as thoroughly established, that they have emptiness as their intrinsic nature, and are not flowers as their intrinsic nature.
It says “form also has not come about” because an ultimate form does not have the production of a compounded form. Thus, it says “what has not come about is not form” because an uncompounded phenomenon that has not come about does not have the mark of a falsely imagined form.
“Does not contradict designation and gives instruction in the true nature of dharmas”1122 P18k P25k
means he gives instruction without contradicting the ultimate or the conventional.
[B18]
How should bodhisattva great beings train in the perfection of wisdom?
“Kauśika, bodhisattva great beings, having thus understood how all dharmas are mere designations, should train in the perfection of wisdom.”1123 P18k P25k
This indicates the last of the three earlier questions,1124 “How should a bodhisattva great being train in the perfection of wisdom?”
and so on—this is saying they train without training, just as, to illustrate, they stand without standing.
In order to teach that “they do not train in form and so on because they see that form and so on are nonexistent things,” it says
and so on.
“Śatakratu… inquired… why do bodhisattva great beings not see form,”1126 P18k P25k
and so on, and to teach that “they do not see form because it is empty,” it says1127
and so on, as the reason they do not train. It means both a training and something that is trained in are nonexistent, so they do not train.
“Kauśika, those who do not train in the emptiness of form… up to those who do not train in the emptiness of the knowledge of all aspects, train in the emptiness of form without making a division into two, up to train in the emptiness of the knowledge of all aspects without making a division into two,”
says that just those who do not train are the ones who train. “Without making a division into two” means they are the same as emptiness, so, when they have trained in the emptiness of a single dharma, they have trained in the emptiness of all. Hence it is explaining that the emptiness of a single dharma is the emptiness of all.
“Those who train in the emptiness of form without making a division into two, up to train in the knowledge of all aspects without making a division into two… train in countless, infinite buddhadharmas.” P18k P25k
This is teaching that those who thus train in the emptiness of all dharmas train in the six perfections and so on, up to train in all the buddhadharmas.
Then,
teaches that training in the perfections and so on, up to the buddhadharmas, is not to increase or decrease form and so on. It means that training is not to increase the bright side or decrease the dark side.
Then,
is teaching that where there are thus no dharmas to be increased or decreased, there are no special dharmas to be gotten hold of [F.180.a] and no bad dharmas to be reduced.
It says that, and then with
“Venerable Subhūti, why do bodhisattva great beings not train in order to get hold of or get rid of form?” P18k P25k
the elder Śāriputra asks him why, given that bodhisattvas eliminate bad dharmas and obtain special dharmas, there is nothing for them to get hold of or get rid of. After he asks that, the elder Subhūti says
teaching that there are no grasped and grasper. It gives as the reason for that,
and so on—something plucked out of thin air has no “production.” Something lasting in its nature does not change so there is no
of something not there before. There is no stopping so there is no
of something gotten hold of. There is nothing to get hold of so there is no
of something not there before. There is nothing to reject so there is no
to eliminate. Since there is no purification there is no
and since there is no defilement there is no
He asks about the perfection of wisdom to teach, in regard to the perfection of wisdom itself, the knowledge of path aspects and the knowledge of all aspects.
“Subhūti’s chapter” is all of the intermediate exegesis of the perfection of wisdom.1134 This is saying that the knowledge of all aspects has originated based on the perfection of wisdom, so you should grasp the explanation of it also from there.
The sustaining power of the tathāgata
Given that the exegesis of the deep dharmas is within the range of a tathāgata, the chief of the gods does not accept that it is Subhūti’s explanation, so, setting the scene for the noble Subhūti to have given such an exegesis, [F.180.b] he asks,1135
“Is it through your noble might, is it through your sustaining power…?” P18k P25k
“the Tathāgata’s sustaining power,” P18k P25k
that is, worthy ones give explanations of doctrine through the Tathāgata’s sustaining power. Then the chief of the gods, not accepting that either, says
Then the elder, having rejoiced in that statement, to teach that in ultimate mode the tathāgata is to be taken as tathatā,1136 with
“the tathāgata cannot be apprehended in the true nature of dharmas that is without anything that sustains it,” P18k P25k
and so on, teaches that there is no dharma called tathāgata at all. There are no false imagined dharmas in the true nature of dharmas, so “in” that “true dharmic nature” of all dharmas “without anything that sustains it” there is no “tathāgata.” And because there are no dharmas unincluded in the true nature of dharmas,
“nor can the tathāgata be apprehended elsewhere than the true nature of dharmas that is without anything that sustains it.” P18k
Because the true nature of dharmas does not abide in falsely imagined phenomena,
“the true nature of dharmas that is without anything that sustains it cannot be apprehended in the tathāgata.” P18k P25k
And because there is no true nature of dharmas elsewhere than dharmas,
“nor can the true nature of dharmas that is without anything that sustains it be apprehended elsewhere than the tathāgata.” P18k
Construe the
section like this,1137 and construe the
and
of
and so on, ending with
section like this as well.
“The true dharmic nature of the tathāgata is not conjoined with or disjoined from the true dharmic nature of form. … It is not conjoined with or disjoined from something other than the true dharmic nature of form.” P18k P25k
It says so because they are not different, [F.181.a] they are the same. The alternatives when a basis is conjoined with something on a basis or with something else, or disjoined from them, are that they are acceptable if they are different and not acceptable if they are not. Construe
“thus, Kauśika, not being conjoined with and not being disjoined from all dharmas—this is its might, this is its sustaining power,” P18k P25k
in the suchness section, in the same way. It is the “might” of emptiness, the “sustaining power” of emptiness, in the sense that the explanation has come about taking emptiness as the point of departure.
it says this because form and so on do not exist—
It says this because the perfection of wisdom is something that does not exist, so it is not something else either. Therefore, it is teaching that because something does not exist it is not something else. It says
“Form is not the perfection of wisdom”1139 P18k P25k
teaches that both form and the perfection of wisdom are things that do not exist;
“and there is no perfection of wisdom other than form” P18k P25k
means you cannot say it is different, because it is something that does not exist. And so it says,
The perfection of wisdom is great, immeasurable, infinite, and limitless
Then Śatakratu, to teach again that this exposition of the doctrine should be taken to be amazing, makes a fourfold statement that1141
“The perfection of wisdom… is great… the perfection of wisdom… is immeasurable… the perfection of wisdom… is infinite… [and] the perfection of wisdom… is limitless.” P18k P25k
with at that time “it will be there” or “will not be there”; and
with “it is there” or “is not there.” Thus, it is “great” because it is not divided into three time periods.
ultimate form is “immeasurable” because you cannot delineate it as “just this much.” It is
because it cannot be given a size by counting. It is
because there is no termination of instants. The “prior limit” is production, the “later limit” is cessation, and the “middle” is lasting for an instant.
Having thus at first taught that the perfections are unlimited, it then teaches the unlimited in four parts:1144 the unlimited knowledge of all aspects, the unlimited body of dharmas, unlimited suchness, and unlimited beings.
Among these, what are “unlimited beings”? Their “limits” are the two extremes: the permanent extreme and the annihilation extreme. The nonexistence of those extremes is the state where the extremes are absent, so beings are “unlimited.” Suppose beings existed. In that case they would have limits. But since beings are in their intrinsic nature just nonexistent, unlimited beings with an intrinsic nature do not exist. Suppose a certain being is taught in this explanation of the doctrine. In that case unlimited beings would also be taught. But since it does not teach a being, there are no unlimited beings here either. Therefore, it says,
This means that because it does not teach a being it therefore also does not teach that beings are unlimited.
Then,
“Kauśika, if a tathāgata, worthy one, perfectly complete buddha remaining for as many eons as there are sand particles in the Gaṅgā River were to say the word being again and again,” P18k P25k
and so on, teaches that a statement from the mouth does not make beings unlimited. They are unlimited in their intrinsic nature because they are nonexistent. Suppose beings were made unlimited as a statement in the mouth, that from what the Tathāgata says beings might be born or cease. It means because that is not the case, beings are not unlimited because it has been said they are.
“Kauśika, from this one of many explanations you should know this perfection of wisdom is unlimited because beings are unlimited.” P18k P25k
This means suppose a being is taught in this explanation, so it exists in reality. Then the two extremes would also exist. But those two are not taught so this perfection is limitless. Because a being is not taught, therefore a being does not exist. Because it does not exist the two extremes do not exist either. Therefore, because it does not teach a being this perfection is unlimited.
“Without apprehending any dharma… still they make known the presentation of the three vehicles”1146— P18k P25k
ultimately and conventionally.
this means the dharma body’s tathāgata is the intrinsic nature of the buddhadharmas. When bodhisattvas train in that, because it is ultimately the intrinsic nature of the buddhadharmas there is also no difference between bodhisattvas and tathāgatas so
“you… should therefore call them… just tathāgatas.” [F.182.b] P18k P25k
Since bodhisattvas newly practicing the buddhadharmas are the intrinsic nature of the buddhadharmas, because he1148 would teach,
having seen that he was inseparable from the buddhadharmas, prophesied he would be a tathāgata. Thus it gives the example of Dīpaṅkara.
“It is amazing, Lord, this perfection of wisdom of the bodhisattva great beings, through not appropriating and rejecting form,” P18k P25k
up to
Explanation of Chapters 24 to 33
Beneficial qualities
and so on, takes as its point of departure the Perfection of Wisdom that is being explained.1151 It teaches the beneficial qualities that come about in this life and in later lives from this explanation of the Dharma that up to here has constituted the meaning, and that serves as the cause for an increase of much merit.
teaches just a concordant cause with emptiness as the sustainable position, which is to say, to them1153 all ordinary things appear as empty, and the self, too, appears as empty.
Here it teaches why
That
is wicked action. A level or a place of the gods is
That
is a bodhisattva. It is because they are all nonexistent. I will not spell it out [F.183.a] here because the scripture is easy to interpret.
“guarding” is establishing all physical well-being; “protection” is defending against all external dangers; and “safekeeping” is stopping internal sickness and so on.
Here, furthermore, it teaches four benefits: not being infiltrated, not dying an untimely death, not getting scared and so on, and being protected by the gods.
Teaching by analogy, with
“to illustrate, … if this… were filled with śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas like a thicket of sugarcane,” P18k P25k
and so on, it teaches the greater value.1155
This teaches the benefits in this life and the many benefits in future lives. There are the ten,
and so on;1156 they
and teach the doctrine; they
“have taken possession of… all the buddhadharmas”; P18k P25k
calm those who fight and contradict them and so on; the causes of those; perfectly gaining the six perfections; the absence of being disturbed1157 and so on; the analogy of medicine;1158 stopping all nonbright dharmas;1159 protecting and increasing
and so on; promotion of the ten wholesome actions; promotion of all the buddhadharmas; and
in each of the six perfections.1161
it is “made available” to
“bodhisattvas… practicing the ordinary” P18k P25k
practices to fully guide them in the pursuit of the career, and it is also “made available” in order to lessen their conceit when
“without skillful means” P18k P25k
they are conceited. When they pursue the career
anything and this perfection of wisdom is completely guiding them, it has been made available in order to fully guide them, and been made available in order to lessen their conceit because they do not become conceited. [F.183.b]
Merits
Then1163 it teaches that it protects from weapons in a battle and the reasons for that; that it protects from external harms and the reasons for that; and that it does not present an opportunity for infiltration.1164 It teaches with the example of the site of awakening; and with1165
“having borne respectfully in mind this perfection of wisdom written out in book form” P18k P25k
it teaches the qualities of the perfection of wisdom as a collection of statements and collection of letters. It teaches that places come to serve as caityas because of the perfection of wisdom, and it teaches that the worship there of the perfection of wisdom is superior to worship of a caitya filled with the physical remains of a tathāgata and the reasons for that; that there are more beings who are lacking and many fewer who are good and the reasons for that; that in the ten directions there are more beings in the deficient vehicle and the reasons for that; that it is necessary to engage constantly in listening to this explanation and so on; that worshiping it1166 is superior to worshiping
that there is more merit from that than from worshiping just a
“Jambudvīpa,” P18k P25k
just a
“millionfold world system,” P18k P25k
or just a
“billionfold world system” P18k P25k
full of stūpas; and that there is more merit from worshiping the perfection of wisdom than all beings in all world systems worshiping that many stūpas. Similarly, it teaches there is more merit from worshiping it than if1167
“each single being of the beings in as many world systems as there are sand particles in the Gaṅgā River in each of the ten directions” P18k P25k
were to have made a stūpa of the seven precious things and worshiped it, and the reasons for that. It teaches that when the perfection of wisdom is present in the world the cause of the special ordinary and extraordinary good qualities comes about; the entrusting to Śatakratu;1168 and the benefits conveyed using the analogy of the gods and asuras when they
and so on. It gives it the names1169
and teaches the reasons for those. It is “a great knowledge-mantra” because it has all ordinary and extraordinary attributes and hence is exceedingly great; it is “an unsurpassable knowledge-mantra” [F.184.a] because there is no other above it; and it is “a knowledge-mantra equal to the unequaled” because there is none equal to it. By giving the illustration of
it teaches that it serves as the cause of all bright dharmas issuing forth, and it serves as the cause of skillful means. It also teaches1170
and they are not persecuted by retainers of
“a royal family.” P18k P25k
It teaches the benefits of these good qualities:1171 they will not be separated from all the bright dharmas; they will not be
or as ghosts; they will not
a low caste; they will have
and signs; and they will take birth in a buddhafield,
and so on.
“religious mendicants… a hundred of them… went back,” P18k P25k
and the reasons for that, and that
that all the gods offer worship and praise, and make the commitment to
and that those who take it up will become endowed with the finest wholesome roots. In this context,1175 what emerges from the perfection of wisdom is the knowledge of all aspects.
and
“the perfection of wisdom” P18k P25k
teaches that they are different conventionally, and
“the knowledge of all aspects is not one thing and the perfection of wisdom another” P18k P25k
teaches that they are not different ultimately.
“The knowledge of all aspects issues forth from the perfection of wisdom” P18k P25k
is the practice level;
“the perfection of wisdom issues forth from the knowledge of all aspects” [F.184.b] P18k P25k
is the result level.
“The knowledge of all aspects is not one thing and the perfection of wisdom another” P18k P25k
because both constitute the dharma body.
“all the buddhadharmas are preceded by the perfection of wisdom,” P18k P25k
up to
it says that when giving has been dedicated to the knowledge of all aspects, at that time, having understood analytically that the perfection of giving and the knowledge of all aspects are not different and not two at the result level, when engaging in giving it
“gets the name ‘perfection of giving.’ ” P18k P25k
the true dharmic nature of form is “by way of the nonduality of form”; falsely imagined form is “by way of nonapprehending”; and conceptualized form is “by way of nonappropriating.” In
“that which is nondual cannot be apprehended,”
the nondual is the thoroughly established phenomenon. It is not settled down on as something apprehended and falsely imagined.
“That which cannot be apprehended is not appropriated”
means that the absence of settling down by way of apprehending is not appropriated by the conceptualization that pays attention to it.
Then again it teaches1179 infinite good qualities of the perfection of wisdom: that it serves as the cause of
and so on, and surpasses the
“morality… of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas” P18k P25k
and so on. It teaches Śatakratu’s commitment to
the gods connecting with confidence giving a readiness to speak;1180 not being cowed in front of retinues; [F.185.a] not fault-finding; not feeling cowed and so on; being liked by the whole world; the seamless1181 true nature of dharmas; all the gods taking up the perfection of wisdom; the offering of a gift of Dharma to them; the gods guarding; the sign
the inferior gods withdrawing; belief in the vast;1183 worship of the place; feeling a sense of physical pleasure and so on; having no weariness and so on; having good dreams;
not being greedy for the four requirements;1185 worshiping all the buddhas in world systems all around in the ten directions with the four requirements; there being more merit merely from having respected this perfection of wisdom, even if it has not been taken up and so on, than from having stūpas made of the seven various precious stones and worshiping them; and there being more merit from taking up the perfection of wisdom than were
to have
“filled this Jambudvīpa right to the top with the physical remains of the tathāgatas,” P18k P25k
and the reasons for that.
“Kauśika, the perfection of wisdom cannot be apprehended” P18k P25k
because it “cannot be apprehended” with thinking-mind consciousness. It
because it “cannot be pointed out” with words. It
because, since it is not an object of sense consciousness, it “does not obstruct” as an object does. It
because it is separated from all imaginary marks.
because it is not suitable to be conceptualized as something that can be seized or something that cannot be seized;
because it is not a place for the elimination of things on the dark side or [F.185.b] the increase of things on the bright side; or
because it is not a place for the removal of saṃsāric dharmas or the accomplishment of nirvāṇic dharmas. And why? Because it is without all attachments to such conceptualizations. You should connect it in the same way with them all.1187
“A dual perfection of wisdom is not available” P18k P25k
means were the perfection of wisdom to be a mode of seizing and not seizing and so on, it would be in a dual state and would be available with a diverse nature, but it is ultimately one, not broken apart, so ultimately such a proliferation of activity is absent from it.
“Similarly, a perfection of giving, a perfection of morality,” P18k P25k
and so on, in the ultimate state are essentially one, and hence
because they are not broken apart. Therefore, it says,
and so on. All those perfections of wisdom and so on are one in the form of suchness; they are not there as a duality.
and teaches that the physical remains of all the tathāgatas have come about from this perfection of wisdom.
“The perfection of wisdom has no causal sign” P18k P25k
because it
and so on, and is therefore separated from all thought constructions. It “has no token” because it is separated from its own defining mark. It “is inexpressible” because it is not within the range of words. It
because it is not in the form of language. It
“is inconceivable” P18k
because it is self-reflexive analytic knowledge.
After that it teaches that there will be none of the bad forms of life or lesser vehicle aspirations and so on; that there is more merit from taking up this perfection of wisdom than from
“this billionfold world system filled right to the top with the physical remains [F.186.a] of tathāgatas,” P18k P25k
and the reasons for that; that
“the tathāgata and the perfection of wisdom are not two”; P18k P25k
that for all the buddhas in the ten directions to teach the twelvefold doctrine1189 and to read the perfection of wisdom out loud
and that worshiping all the tathāgatas of the ten directions and worshiping the perfection of wisdom
It teaches that those who have taken up the perfection of wisdom and so on stand on the irreversible level;1190 the analogy of
that they reach the true nature of dharmas—
the analogy of
again,1192 that there is more merit from taking up this perfection of wisdom than from
“as many… world systems as there are sand particles in the Gaṅgā River filled right to the top with the physical remains of tathāgatas,” P18k P25k
and the reason for that; and seeing
“the dharma body, the form body, and the knowledge body.”1193 P25k
The “knowledge body” is the knowledge accumulation.
they have transcendental knowledge with conceptualization as their intrinsic nature.
the intrinsic nature that is the inexpressible, the ultimate is what dharmas actually are when they are uncompounded.
“Gives detailed instruction for the three vehicles, and instruction by way of no causal sign, by way of no production, by way of no stopping,”1195 P18k P25k
Ultimately, the perfection of wisdom
and so on. It explains it like this because, again, at the thoroughly established stage such conceptualizations and causal signs do not exist.
“Replied Śatakratu, “This—that is, the perfection of wisdom—is a great perfection.” P18k P25k
He says this having thought about [F.186.b] the intrinsic nature of the wisdom that is perfect. The attention that does not apprehend any dharma does not see it, so it is like space because it is a greater object.
As for the analogy of the trees,1196 the perfection of wisdom is like the trees; those other than it are like the shadows.
It teaches that giving to others has a greater result than personal worship.
this teaches that what has been shared has a greater result.
is teaching the activity of teaching.
is teaching that if even the Tathāgata worshiped this perfection of wisdom, it goes without saying those others than him should. The section of the passage that says,
“Kauśika, those sons of a good family or daughters of a good family who have entered into the Śrāvaka Vehicle or who have entered into the Pratyekabuddha Vehicle,” P18k P25k
is teaching that the perfection of wisdom is the principal cause and therefore should be worshiped.
“from establishing one being in the result of stream enterer, but not so much from establishing the beings in Jambudvīpa in the ten wholesome actions.” P18k P25k
Then, having taught the increase in merit in a further section, teaching that there is more merit from having1200
“written out this perfection of wisdom in book form and bestowed it” P18k P25k
than from, up to
“establishing all the beings in Jambudvīpa in the state of a worthy one and a pratyekabuddha’s awakening,” P18k P25k
and taught that the reason for that is that
“in this perfection of wisdom are taught the dharmas without outflows,” P18k P25k
it teaches that it serves as the cause for the appearance of all ordinary special beings and serves as the cause for the appearance of noble beings. Then there is the section1201 about greater merit from having
“written out this perfection of wisdom in book form and bestowed it” P18k P25k
than from having established all the beings in this four continent world system… thousandfold… millionfold… [F.187.a] a great billionfold world system… or in world systems in the ten directions in the state of a worthy one and a pratyekabuddha’s awakening; the section on the reason for that—that in it are taught dharmas without outflows; the section teaching that it serves as the cause for the appearance of all ordinary special beings and serves as the cause for the appearance of noble beings; and then the teaching on the greater merit, and the teaching that properly paying attention is the main thing.
“There, properly paying attention is this: taking up… this perfection of wisdom with an understanding that operates without duality.”1202 P18k P25k
This means that engaging “with an understanding” that habitually “operates without duality” is “properly paying attention.”
Then there is the section1203 on the great increase in merit and the teaching that meaning is principal.
“There the meaning of the perfection of wisdom is this:” P18k P25k
first,
“not viewing the perfection of wisdom as two and not viewing it as not two.” P18k P25k
This means never mind a dualistic nature, there is not even the idea that because it is separated from the conceptualization of all dharmas the nature of the nonconceptual perfection of wisdom is nondual, so the perfection of wisdom is not viewed in a dual way and it is not viewed in a nondual way either. There,1204
“not viewing the perfection of wisdom as a causal sign or as not a causal sign,” P18k P25k
and so on, teaches the nonexistence of fourteen conceptualizations of fourteen states: being an objective support, the maturation of karma, being a differentiated object of knowledge, transformation of the basis, apprehension of the meaning of true reality, ascending from one level to another level, different levels, practice, paying attention, [F.187.b] elimination, realization, witnessing the true nature of dharmas, meditating on suchness, and nirvāṇa.
There, it says “not as a causal sign and not as not a causal sign” because, when apprehending an objective support, it does not grasp the falsely imagined causal sign of form and so on, and the idea “there is no causal sign” does not occur. Similarly, it says not
because it does not conceive of bringing something into existence at the time of the karmic action, and it does not conceive of being sent out in forms of life at the time of the maturation. Similarly, it says not
because, when differentiating dharmas as objects of knowledge, it does not take anything away by over-negating something that exists, and it does not add anything on by over-reifying something that does not exist. Similarly, it says not
“as defilement or as purification,” P18k P25k
because, when in the state of an ordinary person, the tathāgatagarbha is naturally pure, so there is no defilement, and even when there is a transformation of the basis there is no purification not already there before, like space. Similarly, it says not
because no production or stopping is seen in the true nature of dharmas because all dharmas are not produced and do not stop. Similarly, it says not
because, even when ascending from a lower level to a higher level, ultimately it does not grasp a special realization dharma at a higher level and does not reject an inferior realization dharma at a lower level. Similarly, it says not
because it does not conceive of having to be stationed on a higher level and it does not conceive of having to be not stationed on a lower level, [F.188.a] because both being stationed and not being stationed are simply just imaginary. Similarly, it says not
because when engaging in the practice of calm abiding and special insight the ideas “this is correct practice” and “this is not correct practice” do not occur. Similarly, it says not
because, even when zealously paying attention to true reality correctly, the ideas “this attention is produced in the right way,” and “this is produced in the wrong way” do not occur. Similarly, it says not
because, even though, when eliminating the afflictive obscurations and the knowledge obscurations that are the final basis of suffering, the tiny conceptualization of afflictions is eliminated in stages, such an idea does not occur. Similarly, it says not
because, even when realizing the ultimate in the form of suchness in stages through parts—“in the omnipresent sense, the tip sense, the outflow sense, the neither defilement nor purification sense, the nothing is lacking and nothing added sense” and so on1205—such an idea does not occur. Similarly, it says not
because, even when making the true nature of dharmas manifest and bringing the true nature of dharmas to completion, if there is any idea of something in the form of a dharma or not a dharma the actual stable suchness is not appearing. Similarly, it says not
because even when meditating on suchness the ideas “this is suchness” and “this is something else” do not occur. And similarly, [F.188.b] it says not
“as the very limit of reality or as not the very limit of reality,” P18k P25k
because even when in nirvāṇa “this is the very limit of reality and this is its opposite” is not grasped.
In regard to
it is explained that this “meaning” is counted in one way as what is to be explained and counted in another way as apprehending; and in regard to this “nondual,” that apprehending the meaning to be explained—the perfection of wisdom that has been explained—and the nonconceptual perfection of wisdom is apprehending the meaning of the perfection of wisdom.
Then the section on
Then there is the section about the greater merit from explaining this than from having worshiped
then the section on the merit from explaining this
being greater than the merit from practicing the six perfections
and the section on the perfections while apprehending something.
“counterfeit perfection of wisdom.” P18k P25k
The first is the section teaching cultivation while apprehending something; the second is the section teaching the perfections with results; the third is the section about gaining
and the fourth is the section teaching rejoicing and dedication.
The sections teaching the perfectly pure perfection of wisdom are also two.1207 The first is the section on the instruction that they should not apprehend anything;1208 the second is the section on not having a view of any dharma and not resting on grasping a view as absolute. [F.189.a]
Then there are six sections1209 teaching that there is more merit from explaining it to others than the merit from establishing the beings in Jambudvīpa… in the four continents… in a thousandfold… a millionfold… a billionfold world system… or in world systems in the ten directions in the result of stream enterer; similarly, the six sections teach that there is more merit from explaining it to others than the merit from establishing beings
“in the result of once-returner,” P18k P25k
up to
“a pratyekabuddha’s awakening,” P18k P25k
based on the beings in Jambudvīpa, the four continents and so on; similarly, the six sections teach that there is more merit from explaining it to others than the merit from causing beings to take up
based on the beings in Jambudvīpa, the four continents and so on; similarly, there are also the six sections about those established
and then also the six sections teaching that there is more merit from explaining
for the purpose of speedy clairvoyance than the merit from explaining to those who have been established in the irreversible state.1210 There is then the section where Śatakratu teaches and the section where the elder Subhūti rejoices.1211
Those are the subsections of the exposition here.
Rejoicing and dedication
Then also in this context of teaching that it1212 is greater merit, having taught that merit from rejoicing is highest, to set the scene for the explanation it says,
and so on. The meaning is this:
“in comparison to the bases of meritorious action arisen from” P18k P25k
rejoicing in the giving, morality, and meditation of all beings, śrāvakas, and pratyekabuddhas, the single merit from rejoicing in and dedicating when it is a bodhisattva who has set out to pay attention to not apprehending anything is
“Because all the bases of meritorious action arisen from giving,” P18k P25k
and so on,
“of those… in the Śrāvaka Vehicle and those… in the Pratyekabuddha Vehicle are made” P18k P25k
available just
“for personal disciplining… a bodhisattva’s… is for disciplining all beings.” P18k P25k
After he says that, the elder Subhūti takes it in his hands and says:1214 If all the wholesome roots of all the buddhas in the ten directions, gathering a retinue of beings, bringing them to maturity, freeing them, and so on; the five aggregates;1215 all the buddhadharmas; the collection1216 of Dharma teachings; the dharma body that is reached; the wholesome roots of bodhisattvas; and perfect, complete awakening were apprehended and were to come into being, since the wholesome roots from the rejoicing of bodhisattvas has to do with an absence of
“entities and objective supports,” P18k P25k
they would be like the four errors.1217 If anything like those “objective supports” and “entities” existed, in that case, all dharmas—form, feeling, and so on; the thought of awakening, the six perfections, the aggregates, the constituents, the sense bases, and so on; up to
would also exist like them. But if they, like those objective supports and like those entities, were to be nonexistent, in that case they would all be nonexistent. He is asking how, if that is the case, since the objective supports, entities, wholesome roots, rejoicing, and bases of meritorious action would be nonexistent, would dedication be achieved. He is saying that has to be explained.
“And if, just like it is with the entities and how it is with the objective supports too, awakening is like that; if thought is like that,” P18k P25k
means in that case, just as the entities and objective supports are nonexistent, the thought of awakening and so on would be nonexistent too. [F.190.a]
[B19]
After he says that, the bodhisattva Maitreya says that there is no objection that they fashion causal signs and make the dedication if they are bodhisattvas who are characterized by having a mature knowledge of emptiness, but the objection is properly directed to those bodhisattvas who are immature, not well trained, and new. Those who have a knowledge of emptiness do not fashion causal signs and make the dedication.
“Venerable monk Subhūti, if those bodhisattva great beings again and again practice the six perfections,”1218 P18k P25k
and so on, teaches that because they are new they do not have faults like the four errors.
Then,
“Venerable monk Subhūti, you should not give an exposition of this doctrine… like this in the presence of bodhisattvas who have newly set out in the vehicle,” P18k P25k
and so on, teaches that new bodhisattvas are not receptacles for the explanation of this emptiness. If it is explained to them, because they have a
and so on, it teaches that there is the fault that what they have gotten will be spoiled and what they have not gotten will be spoiled too.
“The explanation… has to be given in the presence of bodhisattvas irreversible…”— P18k P25k
it is not wrong when it is explained to those who are mature.
“they will be, venerable monk Subhūti, those whose bases of meritorious action arisen from rejoicing will be dedicated in that way to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening,” P18k P25k
and so on, teaches the ultimate dedication.
Fashioning causal signs and making the dedication is illogical in four ways:
there is no connection between the two—the rejoicing thought and the dedicating thought; there is no connection between apprehending the basis, the wholesome root, and the basis of the meritorious action; there is no connection between the two—[F.190.b] the dedication and to what the dedication is being made; and there is no dedication.
of the wholesome roots to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening
teaches that there is no connection between the two thoughts.
“And those entities and those objective supports, those wholesome roots, and those bases of meritorious action arisen from rejoicing are extinguished, stopped, nonexistent, and have run out,” P18k P25k
and so on, teaches that there are no “entities” and so on.
teaches that there is no connection between the two—the dedication and to what the dedication is being made.
“The intrinsic nature of thought cannot be dedicated” P18k P25k
teaches that there is no thought making the dedication. It teaches that thought is a construction because of the nonexistence of its intrinsic nature, and nonexistence cannot make a dedication.
“When bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom thus know the perfection of wisdom is a nonexistent thing,” P18k P25k
and so on, teaches that it is characterized as a nonexistent thing.
“The bodhisattva Maitreya then asked the elder Subhūti, “Venerable monk Subhūti, when bodhisattva great beings who have newly set out in the vehicle,” P18k P25k
and so on. He is asking what the rejoicing and dedication of those who have newly set out are. And with
“when bodhisattvas… who have newly set out in the vehicle,” P18k P25k
because of the absence of constructing those in thought.
“Grasp the bodhisattva lineage”— P18k P25k
pay attention to suchness.
Then, having taught one of the many explanations of rejoicing in general, it sets the scene for the ultimate explanation with,1222
“Furthermore, Maitreya, bodhisattva great beings who have newly set out in the vehicle should compress together the merit accumulations and the wholesome roots planted by the lord buddhas whose path has come to an end, whose thought constructions and cravings for existence have been cut off,” P18k P25k
and so on.
Then Maitreya asks1223 him how do they not go wrong and then the elder Subhūti teaches a section on dedication free of basic immorality, ninefold.
There, the first section is that dedication is not wrong based on the absence of the six perceptions,1224 but otherwise it will be wrong.
The second section is where it says
if they contemplate like this: ultimately there is no dedication because thinking about the thought of buddhas and so on, as well as the thought of the dedication,
even awakening is nonexistent, dharmas are empty of an intrinsic nature, and dedication is nonexistent as well.
śrāvakas, bodhisattvas, buddhas, and ordinary beings,
“they rejoice in them and dedicate them, paying attention to their being”
extinguished,
“paying attention to there being no dedication, and paying attention to the” P25k
“by that dedication they” P25k
dedicate to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening.
Then the fourth is where it says when they
the merit from dedication is isolated from all dharmas, and all dharmas are isolated from an intrinsic nature, they dedicate with
Then the fifth, as before, is where it says that when they rejoice in the wholesome roots and dedicate them, they dedicate while aware that the śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattvas, wholesome roots, dedication, awakening, and the thought doing the dedication are the same in their intrinsic nature.
Then the sixth1227 is where it says that when they fashion a causal sign for the wholesome roots and dedicate them, and, by paying attention to past buddhas as past, fashion a causal sign for them and pay attention to them as an object, it becomes wrong, but when
they dedicate perfectly.
Then the seventh is the section of the dedication that has not been poisoned.1228 This is where the bodhisattva Maitreya, thinking how is it possible that the two—not fashioning a causal sign and dedication—are not a contradiction, asks the elder Subhūti, who then teaches that it is when the dedication is made by
“bodhisattvas who are skilled.” P18k P25k
Then the bodhisattva Maitreya teaches that bodhisattvas who want to make a perfect dedication
do not exist; nevertheless, look how having fashioned causal signs I construct them all in my mind. Tathāgatas do not permit such a dedication where, having fashioned such causal signs, they conceptualize them. It is similar to a delicacy that has been poisoned. So such a dedication should not be made, and training should not be done in that. Therefore, having taken the Buddha alone as authority, they make a dedication, thinking, “I shall dedicate those wholesome roots just as the lord buddhas [F.192.a] understand them.”
Then the eighth is where it says1229 dedication while paying attention to all dharmas that do not belong to the three realms and three time periods
Dedication other than that
And then the ninth is where it says
which is the domain of the transcendental knowledge of the buddhas.
Then the Lord, having rejoiced in many ways in those statements,1230 gives a threefold teaching about greatly increasing merit.
The first is
the merit
“if all the beings that are in the billionfold world system were to obtain the ten wholesome actions… the concentrations, … the immeasurables, … the absorptions, and… the clairvoyances.” P18k P25k
The second1232 is that one has even more than the merit created from having served those beings if they
“were to become stream enterers,” P18k P25k
and so on, up to
“worthy ones and pratyekabuddhas,” P18k P25k
with the four necessities for as long as they live.
And the third1233 is, were all those beings to have become bodhisattvas, just that same one has even more than the masses of merit such as those created by all the beings in the ten directions were they to have served each of them with the four necessities and
“with all the requirements for happiness… for as many eons as there are sand particles in the Gaṅgā River.” P18k P25k
“Lord, if that basis of meritorious action had a physical form it would not fit in even as many world systems as there are sand particles in the Gaṅgā River” P18k P25k
means all of it would not fit there.
Then there is a section1234 on earlier merits being inferior [F.192.b] because they have the perception of a causal sign and
“a perception that apprehends something,” P18k
and masses of dedication merits being greater than them because they do not exist.
Then there are two sections1235 where all the chiefs of the gods and gods living in the desire realm, and all the Brahmās in the higher realms, have worshiped and raised their voices in praise, and then the section teaching that the merit of a single bodhisattva who dedicates while not apprehending anything is much greater than the merit from the dedication by way of apprehending something by
“all the beings in a billionfold world system” P18k P25k
who have become bodhisattvas.
The first rejoicing is
which teaches the sameness of those buddhas and those wholesome roots based on the fact that there is no worse or better in suchness. Similarly, because
“there is no production, cessation, defilement, purification,” P18k P25k
and so on,
just like those buddhas, śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattvas, and ordinary beings, and the wholesome roots, and the dedicating thought that all abide in suchness.
Then the second is also rejoicing1238 while understanding analytically that all dharmas are comparable to
which is to say, all dharmas are the same because they are comparable to that; because all dharmas are isolated from an intrinsic nature, so earlier at the stage of ordinary beings they
because all dharmas that are pure in their basic nature
earlier and
“are not purified” P18k
later;
through the power of earlier causes and conditions; because they have no intrinsic nature,
and later
Then there is the section1240 teaching that the merit from dedicating the aggregates of morality from
“practicing the perfections… by way of not apprehending anything” P18k P25k
is greater than merit accumulated from having served all the buddhas in the ten directions with all the requirements for happiness and by practicing the six perfections together with apprehending something.
These are the sections of the text on rejoicing.
Explanation of Chapters 34 to 36
Wheel of the Dharma and the perfection of wisdom
Then Śāriputra, feeling faith after having heard about the vast merit from rejoicing in, and dedication of, such worship and reciting of the perfection of wisdom, and from giving and so on, begins with seventeen statements1241 in praise of this perfection of wisdom, to generate faith in others in the retinue.
“Turning the wheel of the Dharma that has twelve aspects three times”— P18k P25k
the Lord turned “the wheel of the Dharma” of the four truths “that has twelve aspects three times.” There he turns it three times: One is: “These are the four truths.” It is the part of the speech stating the intrinsic nature of the four truths. The second turning is the part of the speech stating that just those four truths have to be comprehended, eliminated, realized, and cultivated. The third turning is the part of the speech stating that “I have comprehended, eliminated, realized, and cultivated” just those four truths. Those are the turning three times.
For the truth of suffering [F.193.b] there are three aspects: the intrinsic nature of suffering, that it has to be comprehended, and that “I have comprehended.” For the truth of origination there are three aspects: the intrinsic nature of origination, that it has to be eliminated, and that “I have eliminated it.” For the truth of cessation there are three aspects: the intrinsic nature of cessation, that it has to be realized, and that “I have realized it.” And for the truth of the path there are three aspects: the intrinsic nature of the path, that it has to be cultivated, and that “I have cultivated it.” Thus, there are twelve aspects.
Śatakratu has already asked earlier1243 about the way to stand in the perfection of wisdom, and it has already been explained, so this is not a question about the way to stand in the perfection of wisdom. Here “how does one stand” means this: how, by respecting and serving it, does one stand?1244
“The perfection of wisdom is itself the Teacher and the Teacher is himself the perfection of wisdom.” P18k P25k
Because it does the work of the Buddha it is envisioned and taught to be not different.
“assisted by the perfection of wisdom” P18k P25k
and so on. It teaches that this perfection of wisdom is principal. It teaches that even though all the perfections other than that are causes of unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening, they are governed by it, so it should be greatly respected.
them all1245
“to the knowledge of all aspects” P18k
by rejoicing in them.
“When the five perfections are assisted by the perfection of giving, they do not get the name perfection.”1246 [F.194.a] P18k P25k
It says this because it taught earlier that all six are lodged one in the other and work as a single cause.
is teaching that when you complete one of the six perfections, all six are completed, so they are reciprocally one and just simply one cause, but, unlike the perfection of wisdom that is the nature of them all, they are not therefore the cause in all respects.
“Lord, how should [they]… find and produce within themselves the perfection of wisdom?”1247 P18k P25k
Here too it is not asking how they find and produce the perfection of wisdom within themselves, it is asking what the result of finding and producing the perfection of wisdom within themselves is.
means: so form is a nonexistent thing.
“Lord, how do they find and produce within themselves the perfection of wisdom so that they do not find and produce within themselves form?”1248 P18k P25k
This is the second question Śāriputra asks the Lord. It means: in what form within themselves should the perfection of wisdom be found and produced so that the nonexistence of form and so on is feasible?
“Śāriputra, they should find and produce within themselves the perfection of wisdom as the nonenactment, the nonproduction, the noncessation, the nonappearance, the nondestruction, and the nonapprehension of form.” P18k P25k
In the context of a thoroughly established phenomenon there is no “enactment” of falsely imagined form. There is neither “production nor cessation” from the perspective of a continuum. In each instant there is neither “appearance nor nondestruction.” And there is no “apprehension” because in all respects there is no production. It
“It is counted as the perfection of wisdom.” P18k P25k
The nonconceptual effortless wisdom that has gone to the other side of the nonexistence of all dharmas is the “perfection of wisdom.”
“The perfection of wisdom… does not cause even the knowledge of all aspects to be gained. It does not apprehend it.”1249 P18k P25k
In the context of the dharma body, just that is the perfection of wisdom, just that is the knowledge of all aspects. It does not apprehend that “the knowledge of all aspects is one thing and the perfection of wisdom another.”1250
“Kauśika… it is because the perfection of wisdom does not cause it to be gained as a name, as a causal sign, or as something to be enacted.” P18k P25k
The true nature of dharmas is nonconceptual. The perfection of wisdom does not grasp any dharma at all through a name, causal sign, or enactment, so the knowledge of all aspects cannot be apprehended through that name, that causal sign, or that enactment.
“Well then, Lord, how does this perfection of wisdom cause it to be gained?” P18k P25k
Insofar as the perfection of wisdom does cause the knowledge of all aspects to be gained conventionally, how does it cause it to be gained?
“The perfection of wisdom causes it to be gained without apprehending, without asserting, without being stationed on, without forsaking, without settling down on, without grasping, and without rejecting anything at all, but it does not cause any dharma to be gained.” P18k P25k
When apprehended and apprehender have become the same thing in the same form, this wisdom does not “apprehend” that this is a dharma I have to grasp; does not “assert” that I myself am the grasper; does not see, as does the eye and so on, as something “stationed”; does not see any defiling conceptualization that has to be “forsaken”; [F.195.a] does not “settle down” even slightly on “this is true” as being in the nature of truth; and does not “grasp or reject” because it does not see what is grasped and has to be joined with in the form of bright and dark sides. At that time, because it itself is the entity of the knowledge of all aspects, it is also said that “it causes the knowledge of all aspects to be gained.”
Because all dharmas do not exist, they are not produced, do not cease, do not occasion anything, are not apprehended, and are not destroyed in that context, it is explained with the names
and so on.
It says if they
“have such ideas as ‘the perfection of wisdom causes all dharmas to be gained’ or ‘the perfection of wisdom does not cause all dharmas to be gained,’… the perfection of wisdom is forsaken,” P18k P25k
because both an existent thing and a nonexistent thing are thought constructions.
This means the Lord has confidence in and comprehends form that is marked as a nonexistent thing. Construe the others similarly.
“Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom gives me confidence because form cannot be apprehended,”1253 P18k P25k
and so on, means that having comprehended all dharmas, form and so on, as the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature, the Lord has “confidence in”—that is, has a directly realization of—the perfection of wisdom.
it1255 does not make the form of the true nature of dharmas that is thoroughly established bigger and it does not make falsely imagined form smaller. Construe them all similarly.
“Those bodhisattva great beings with such notions, Lord, are not practicing the [F.195.b] the perfection of wisdom.”1256 P18k P25k
Were this perfection of wisdom to do anything, in that case it might be right to say ‘this perfection of wisdom does not do anything,’ but because this perfection of wisdom is beyond every false imagination it does not do anything at all. Therefore it is not right to say that “the perfection of wisdom does not make form bigger and does not make form smaller” and so on.
“Lord… because… they are not in harmony with the perfection of wisdom as cause”1257 P18k P25k
means that because all dharmas remain in their intrinsic nature, in their own basic nature as it really is, there is nothing there in harmony with the perfection of wisdom as cause.
Now it again teaches that even the perfection of wisdom is like form and so on, in twelve rounds of teaching beginning with
You should view the perfection of wisdom as marked by nonproduction because a being is marked by not arising.
There, “because beings are not produced,” up to
“because one who sees is not produced,”1258
intends the selflessness of persons. From
intends the selflessness of dharmas.
of form and so on. There is no realization of them.
Not bound and not freed
means because all dharmas are the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature.
The elder Śāriputra,1261 having heard that this perfection is thus in its nature big and vast, feels faith, and for the bodhisattvas poses four questions about the death and birth of bodhisattvas, the amount of time since they have set out, [F.196.a] the number of tathāgatas they have attended on, and the amount of time they have been practitioners of the perfections. That same part of the text sets the scene for an account of what happens to those forsaking the good Dharma, and that same part of the text also sets the scene for it being
“hard… to believe in this perfection of wisdom.”1262 P18k P25k
“Just how deep, Lord, is this perfection of wisdom in which it is so hard for them to believe?” P18k P25k
explains about
explains about
and explains about
Thus, it sets the scene for a fourfold explanation.
Among these,
During the period of the cycle of existences, that which is the appearance of the thoroughly established true dharmic nature of form “is not bound,” because, for the entire duration it is not bound by all the bonds of affliction, karma, and maturation, and later during the period of the thoroughly established phenomenon it “is not freed” because freedom does not exist, so being “bound and freed” is said of just a falsely imagined state, not of the true dharmic nature of form that, like space, is not tainted by anything at all. Therefore, it says
“because the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature in form is form.” P18k P25k
This means falsely imagined form, the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature, is the true dharmic nature of form. You should construe all dharmas, up to the knowledge of all aspects, like this as well.
Again, to elucidate just that, that it is not bound and is not freed, there is an explanation in tandem with the three time periods:
The “prior limit” is the true dharmic nature of form in the cycle of existences during the period when there are stains and impurity. [F.196.b] The
describes the present period during which there is purity and impurity.
describes the future period when there is purity.
“Because the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature in the prior limit is form” P18k P25k
teaches that what is marked as abiding without change in all three time periods is suchness, indicating that the true nature of dharmas does not have the mark of being freed over time.
Purity
Having thus taught, through the explanation of not being bound and not being freed, that saṃsāra and nirvāṇa are nonexistent things, again, to teach that defilement and purification do not exist it begins the explanation of purity with
There the dharmas from form, up to, finally, the knowledge of all aspects, have no bonds so there is no defilement. Because there is no defilement they are pure in their intrinsic nature, and because they are pure in their intrinsic nature there are no purification dharmas either. Ultimately purification dharmas do not do anything at all to natural purity. So, even though defilement and purification are impossible, foolish beings construct them. They are not thoroughly established.
Thus, having taught in one way that it is hard to believe,1266 it again teaches it is hard to believe because of purity. There, “just that purity of form is the purity of the result” means there is nothing other than purity that results from the purification dharmas—the perfections, the dharmas on the side of awakening, and so on. The true dharmic nature of form, the constantly abiding purity in the form of the thoroughly established nature, just that is purity in the form of the result.
You should construe all the dharmas like this as well.
Having thus [F.197.a] taught the intrinsic nature of purity, then it teaches that the purity of all dharmas is also one, not broken apart:
“That purity of form is the purity of the result. That purity of the result is the purity of the perfection of wisdom. That purity of the perfection of wisdom is the purity of form.” P18k P25k
There, the true dharmic nature of the form state is called “the purity of form.” The very limit of reality called the “nirvāṇa” state is called “the purity of the result.” The dharma body state is called “the purity of the perfection of wisdom.” The meaning there is that the suchness that is the purity of form is the purity of the result, that is, is freed; just that freedom is the purity of the perfection of wisdom, that is, is the dharma body; and just that dharma body is the purity of form, that is, is suchness. Hence suchness, freedom, and the dharma body are ultimately not broken apart.
You should construe up to the purity of the knowledge of all aspects like this as well.
Summing up in conclusion it teaches that the purity of all dharmas is one. Therefore, those purities from the purity of form, the purity of the result, and the purity of the perfection of wisdom, up to the knowledge of all aspects, are
They are “not two” because they are the same; they are “not divided” because you cannot divide them into different things; they are “not separate” because a particular one does not exist; they are “not broken apart” because nothing obstructs them, or, because they are constant.
Thus, it has taught the purity of the result [F.197.b] shared in common with śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas. Now, to teach the uncommon purity of bodhisattvas it leaves out the result, and it teaches having taken up only the purity of the perfection of wisdom.1268
Thus, these two passages1269 teach that the purity of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, and the purity of the tathāgata, are “one.”
Now it teaches the purity in a sequence of three connected sections: the purity that is the nonexistence of a self of persons,1270 the purity that is the nonexistence of secondary afflictions,1271 and the purity that is the nonexistence of a self in dharmas.
The knowledge that a self is a nonexistent thing is the purity of self. There it should be taught in the order of the sections of the text. It teaches that
Because of the purity of form there is the purity of self. Thus, this purity of self and purity of form are not two, are not divided, are not separate, and are not broken apart.
Similarly,
“because of the purity of self, there is the purity of feeling… perception… volitional factors… and consciousness. Because of the purity of consciousness, there is the purity of self,” P25k
and so on, and that
“the purity of self and purity of” P25k
all dharmas, up to, finally,
“the purity of the knowledge of all aspects” P25k
is not two.
Then, in the section on the purity that is the nonexistence of secondary afflictions,
and so on, again explains that the purity of dharmas, up to, finally, the knowledge of all aspects, [F.198.a] and the purity of greed
Similarly connect this with
Then, in the section on the purity that is the nonexistence of a self of dharmas, having taken up the purity of dharmas, the dependent originations, and so on, up to, finally, the knowledge of all aspects, there is the section explaining that the purity of two dharmas is not two:
“Because of the purity of ignorance there is the purity of volitional factors; because of the purity of volitional factors there is the purity of ignorance. Thus, this purity of ignorance and the purity of volitional factors is not two,”1272 P18k P25k
and so on. So too with the perfections as well, it says,
“Because of the purity of the perfection of giving there is the purity of the perfection of morality; because of the purity of the perfection of morality there is the purity of the perfection of giving. Thus, this purity of the perfection of giving and the purity of the perfection of morality is not two,”1273 P18k P25k
and so on. All have to be construed in the same way as well. Thus, you should construe
“because of the purity of the knowledge of the path aspects there is the purity of the knowledge of all aspects, because of the purity of the knowledge of all aspects there is the purity of the knowledge of all path aspects. Thus, this purity of the knowledge of the path aspects and the purity of the knowledge of all aspects is not two,”1274 P25k
and so on.
Then, also in the section gathering the purity of all dharmas together, first, having taken up among the six perfections the purity of the perfection of wisdom, and the purity of the aggregates and so on, up to, finally, the six collections of feelings,1275 and the purity of the knowledge of all aspects, there is the section teaching that it is not two:
“Furthermore, Subhūti, that purity [F.198.b] of the perfection of wisdom is the purity of form. That purity of form is the purity of the knowledge of all aspects. Thus, this purity of the perfection of wisdom, purity of form, and purity of the knowledge of all aspects is not two, not divided, not separate, and not broken apart.”1276 P18k P25k
Similarly connect this with
“feeling, perception, volitional factors, and consciousness,” P25k
up to
“that purity of the perfection of wisdom is the purity of the feeling that arises from the condition of contact with the thinking mind. The purity of the feeling that arises from the condition of contact with the thinking mind is the purity of the knowledge of all aspects. Thus, this purity of the perfection of wisdom, purity of the feeling that arises from the condition of contact with the thinking mind, and purity of the knowledge of all aspects is not two,”1277 P25k
and so on. Then also,1278 having taken up the purity of the dharmas—from the perfection of concentration up to the aggregates and so on, and finally the feelings—and
it teaches that it is not two; and similarly it teaches that the purity of the dharmas—all the perfections, all the emptinesses, up to, finally, the feelings—and
and, similarly, it explains that (1) the purity of the dharmas, the applications of mindfulness, and so on, up to, finally, all-knowledge; and (2) the purity of the dharmas form and so on, up to, finally, the six collections of feelings; and (3) the purity of the knowledge of all aspects is one.
Then it teaches the section on
and
and the section on the purity of the three time periods.1279
The elder Śāriputra, having listened to the exposition of purity up to here, because a retinue is gathered together, musters the confidence to speak and says,1280
and so on. With this begins a sequence of thirteen statements about purity.
says that the true nature of dharmas that is not broken apart from those saṃsāric dharmas, composed of the stains of the many afflictions, secondary afflictions, and conceptualizations, does not become stained by those stains. It is extremely pure at all times, so it is hard for fools to feel confidence in it. Hence it is called “deep because it is extremely pure.”
To illustrate, the sun and moon and so on are extremely pure, that is, they shine brightly where there are no clouds, fog, haze and so on. Similarly, the true dharmic nature of form and so on is called “light because it is extremely pure,” so it says “purity is light because form is extremely pure.”P18k
Because the stains of the proliferation of afflictions and conceptualizations have stopped there is no further linking up, so, because it is stainless and pure, it is said that it “does not link up.”
means because falsely imagined form and so on that have been abandoned do not change places again, they have stopped.
“Lord, purity is without defilement” P18k P25k
is saying that even though there have been clouds, fog, haze and so on, like space, in its basic nature it is thoroughly clean. [F.199.b]
“Lord, there is no obtaining and no clear realization of purity.” P18k P25k
Were the two dharmas—something obtained and a cause of obtaining—to exist, there would be an “obtaining”; were the two dharmas—something clearly realized and a cause of clear realization—to exist, there would be a “clear realization.” But because the mere nonexistence of false imagining and conceptualizing is posited as the “purity” that is the thoroughly established true nature of dharmas, “obtaining” and “clear realization” do not exist in that purity at all.
“Purity” is posited as the dharmas, falsely imagined and conceptualized form and so on, not coming into being, so it is “marked by not coming into being.”
“Lord, purity does not arise in the desire realm… the form realm… [or] the formless realm.” P18k P25k
The desire, form, and formless realms are falsely imagined. When not arising and appearing in them it is called “purity,” so it says
“because you cannot apprehend the desire realm’s intrinsic nature.” P18k P25k
means the self is not the intrinsic nature self-awareness.
it is saying “dharmas are inanimate material” because they are free from conceptual consciousness.
This means it also does not see all dharmas, form and so on.
means things like form and so on are without defining marks. This “does not know” teaches that purity is the mark of the absence of conceptualization. This “purity [F.200.a] does not know form” teaches that dharmas are the mark of nonexistence. The two teach the mark of the nonexistence of apprehended object and apprehending subject.
“Lord, the perfection of wisdom does not help nor does it hinder the knowledge of all aspects,” P18k P25k
because both, marked by suchness, are
Suchness does not help and does not hinder suchness, just like space does not help and does not hinder space. Therefore, it says
“because of the establishment of the dharma-constituent.”1282 P18k P25k
This is teaching that nobody helps or hinders the dharma body, given that at all times it is marked by staying in the same state.
because the extremely pure perfection of wisdom is the mark of not taking hold of anything. Were it to take hold of any dharma it would not be pure.1283
and so on, mean that because the self is something that is nonexistent, form and so on are things that do not exist either, because here you have to take “purity” as something that does not exist. Hence, it says
Earlier it was teaching the pure perfection of wisdom, now it is teaching the purity of selflessness.
They do not obtain or find a transcendent knowledge that was not there before, and a transcendent knowledge that is found is also not lost, so, because there are neither, there is not even awakening. Even “awakening” is falsely imagined.
because the two—defilement and purification—do not exist, it is pure in its intrinsic nature even before, so like space it has no defilement. And even at the period of the final outcome, it is like space that has no purity that was not there before.
[B20]
Having thus completed the explanation of purity, it begins the explanation of the unlimited to inculcate belief in the deep, with
It is “unlimited” because it is not permanent and not annihilated, and is not at the prior limit, later limit, or in the middle. Therefore, it says
“because of the emptiness of what transcends limits and the emptiness of no beginning and no end, Subhūti.” P18k P25k
“Lord, why is such a realization as that the perfection of wisdom of bodhisattva great beings?” P18k P25k
He is asking why, if the perfection of wisdom is so deep a topic as that, is it just an object of bodhisattvas, not of buddhas. It says,
Thus, this perfection of wisdom is not the final one, is not when the work is done. It is an aspect of the path of the knowledge of all aspects, hence it is “just of bodhisattvas.”
“Lord, you cannot apprehend the perfection of wisdom of bodhisattva great beings on this side, on the farther side, or on neither.”1287 P18k P25k
What does this intend? You can suppose “perfection” (pāramitā) is on the way to the other side (para), has arrived at the other side, or is the essential nature of the other side. It says this because, even when taken to be the perfection of wisdom of bodhisattvas, [F.201.a] it is not positioned on this side, it is not positioned on the farther side, and cannot be apprehended on some other that is not included in those sides. “This side” incorporates the compounded; “the farther side” incorporates the uncompounded.
After saying that,
Were any side to be apprehended, then, in that case, it would not be purity. This means it is extremely pure because there are none, and, because it is extremely pure, it is not positioned on either side or anywhere else either.
this means that with the comprehension of the sameness of the three time periods, because of the emptiness of no beginning and no end, there is no notion of this side and no notion of a farther side, and hence “it does not stand on this side and it also does not stand on the farther side.”
Attachment and nonattachment
In order to build trust that the perfection of wisdom is deep, it then again sets the scene for the explanation of attachment and nonattachment from the perspective of practices that apprehend and do not apprehend, with
“they are attached to a name and attached to a causal sign,”1288 P18k P25k
and so on. Seizing on a dharma, form and so on, as a word is falsely imagining. Seizing on a causal sign as a conventional term is conceptualizing. Both are obscurations, so they are “attachment.”
“Subhūti, even though all dharmas are without causal signs and without names” P18k
is teaching that they are within the range of the perfection of wisdom.
“Lord, such an excellent exposition and excellent definitive teaching of this perfection of wisdom… to bodhisattva great beings is amazing”— P18k P25k
this is teaching of the knowledge of path aspects.
is thinking like that by way of apprehending something.
this is the bodhisattva’s knowledge of path aspects.
they do not appear.
means dharmas should not be dedicated to awakening by way of apprehending something, because they stay in the same state and do not undergo transformation.
that obscure the knowledge of path aspects.
Earlier,1294 to build trust, the elder Śāriputra set the scene for the explanation of the perfection of wisdom being deep, and for it being hard to believe in. Now, to demonstrate that he himself has comprehended that it is deep, the elder Subhūti says, “Lord, … [it] is deep.”
Thus all phenomena are always deserted by all attachments, are deserted by a basic nature, are isolated in their basic nature. But falsely imagined attachment is still apprehending, and even though falsely imagined attachment is apprehending, still all dharmas are untainted, that is, are isolated in their intrinsic nature so they are deep.
“The perfection of wisdom… is unmade and does not cause anything to come into being.” P18k P25k
In it there is nothing to be established and nothing is caused to come into being because it is the intrinsic nature of the dharma body.
“The basic nature of a dharma is not two; it is simply one.” P18k P25k
As the intrinsic nature that is suchness, all dharmas are a single entity, but still they appear with different identities. This is difficult to clearly realize. Because suchness is the intrinsic nature of all dharmas [F.202.a] it is called their “basic nature.” That suchness, moreover, is not the cause of any other true nature of dharmas, so it
“is not a basic nature.” P18k P25k
Just that
“Nobody has seen, heard, thought about, been conscious of, or fully awakened to the perfection of wisdom,” P18k P25k
because the perfection of wisdom is not the object of seeing consciousness and so on, nor of thought constructions such as those, because an apprehender and an apprehended object are the same in their intrinsic nature.
“The perfection of wisdom is inconceivable” P18k P25k
means you cannot conceive of it through another dharma, like fire indicated by smoke. Therefore, it says
and so on. It
It makes all dharmas known as the mark of what cannot be apprehended.
Explanation of Chapters 37 and 38
“How do [they]… practice the perfection of wisdom?” P18k P25k
that is, the knowledge of path aspects.
The section of the text to teach that if those conscious of a basic nature practice all dharmas they do not practice the perfection of wisdom is1295
and so on. The second section is to teach that when those conscious of special insight practice the marks of dharmas, they do not practice the perfection of wisdom.
It says,
intending when meditation is completed.
is the unobstructed true dharmic nature of form. When they practice like that
This means that if, when practicing, they have set out like that, then when they awaken to the knowledge of all aspects they will have a realization like that.
Benefits of purity
Subhūti’s [F.202.b] statement that he is amazed, the statement of some monk or other, the statement by Śatakratu, and the statement that guarding, protecting, and keeping safe are not possible are all alike.1297
as a functioning thing that is real and a defining mark and so on;
as a real thing, like a master’s servant;
as a real thing on a foundation or basis; and
“do not falsely project a causal sign of form” P18k
as a basis of a designation that is a conventional term.
The description of
is because those thousand buddhas cause faith to arise in that perfection of wisdom.
The question about
teaching the Dharma1300 is to make it known that during the three periods of time the explanations are of just this perfection of wisdom.
“Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom is pure because form is pure.” P18k P25k
The dharmas, form and so on, that have been apprehended are stainless, so the knowledge of path aspects is also pure.
“Subhūti, form… is unproduced and unceasing, without defilement and without purification.” P18k P25k
When form abides in its intrinsic nature—the true nature of dharmas—and does not appear as produced, ceasing, defiled, or purified, that
not otherwise.
this is teaching that just as space does not become impure even if there are clouds and haze because it is pure in its nature, so too with the perfection of wisdom. The six1302—
“pure… untainted… cannot be grasped… does not say anything… does not converse about anything… cannot be apprehended”— P18k P25k
teach that it is comparable to space.
even though in space something other than that space says something, in space nothing is said and there is no conversation,
reverberate in space, but it is not suitable to say that space says something.
means that because of its intrinsic nature there is no conversation in space. Alternatively, “saying something” is mere sound; “conversing” is naming.
“Subhūti, … because form is extremely pure, cannot be apprehended, is unproduced and unceasing, and without defilement and without purification”1304— P18k P25k
when this perfection of wisdom sees all dharmas, it sees the “pure” aspect of form and so on because the stains of falsely imagined afflictions and conceptualizations constructed in thought do not exist; the aspect that “cannot be apprehended” because it is separated from all apprehending; the “unproduced and unceasing” aspects because it is a thoroughly established phenomenon; and the aspects “without defilement and without purification” because it is isolated from an intrinsic nature. At that point it is called
in its nature.
Having thus taught that the perfection of wisdom is extremely pure, then, to engender faith in it, they
and so on, teaches its benefits in the here and now and in future lives.1305
“In the perfection of wisdom there is no dharma that is produced or ceases, is defiled or purified, or is appropriated or rejected at all” P18k P25k
teaches that production, cessation, and so on do not appear in the perfection of wisdom.
they do not even conceive of the perfection of wisdom as such
endowed with those good qualities.
All dharmas are thoroughly established phenomena that do not alter, so at the time they are thoroughly established phenomena this perfection of wisdom appears like that, which is to say, there is no false projection of having to establish any special dharma; there is no false projection of taking hold of or bestowing any special dharma; there is no false projection of producing dharmas without outflows or stopping bad dharmas; there is no false projection of annihilating the dharmas of cyclic existence or of making purification permanent;1307 there is no false projection of being one or being different things; there is no false projection of coming about through the power of bodhisattva activities not there before or being separated from all obscurations; there is no false projection of having earlier become defiled by afflictions, secondary afflictions, and so on, and later being purified; there is no false projection of making dark dharmas decline and making bright dharmas increase; there is no false projection of being included in the three periods of time; there is no false projection of being established in the three realms or of having to transcend them; and there is no false projection of bestowing the perfection of giving and so on, or of removing their opposing sides of miserliness and so on.
“Subhūti, whether the tathāgatas arise or whether the tathāgatas do not arise”1308 P18k P25k
is teaching the mark of all dharmas that remain in the same state, nothing doing anything at all. Those “tathāgatas,” so called because they know just this state in which dharmas remain, appear in the world. It means just this is their [F.204.a] clear realization, just this is
It says this because ultimately all dharmas are beyond counting. It
removes the notion or idea that it is turning or not turning the wheel of Dharma.
means the perfection of wisdom grasps all dharmas as the mark of the emptiness that is the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature.
“The perfection of wisdom is a great perfection,” P18k P25k
and so on. With the ninety-five statements the elder Subhūti explains at length that this perfection of wisdom engages with all dharmas.1311
There “the perfection of wisdom is a great perfection” teaches that it is a great object, and a great secret in the form of an object. It says about such a secret that it is three: a secret engagement with dharmas, a secret awakening, and a secret turning of the wheel of Dharma.
There, for dharmas, governed by the conventional and ultimate, it engages with perceiving dharmas as dharmas and also engages with perceiving them as not dharmas as well, so it says
“all dharmas are empty of the intrinsic nature of all dharmas.” P18k P25k
“but still, bodhisattva great beings abiding in this perfection of wisdom fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening without fully awakening to any dharma at all.” P18k P25k
Then there is the section with the eightfold turning of the wheel of Dharma:1314 the nonexistence of the Dharma, the nonexistence of the wheel, the nonexistence of the turning, the nonexistence of the intrinsic nature of an explanation, the nonexistence of one who explains, the nonexistence of one who listens, the nonexistence of realization, and the nonexistence of a noble person.
About the nonexistence of the wheel, it says
“because a Dharma that will be turned or will not be turned cannot be apprehended.”1315 P18k P25k
About the nonexistence of turning, it says
About the nonexistence of an explanation, it says
“therefore, this teaching of the perfection of wisdom, this illumination,” P18k P25k
up to
“is the teaching of the perfection of wisdom that is perfectly pure.” P18k P25k
About the nonexistence of one who explains, it says
“nobody teaches that teaching of the perfection of wisdom.” P18k P25k
About the nonexistence of one who listens, it says
About the nonexistence of realization, it says
Glosses
like space, it is not truly real in a form you can apprehend, and not not truly real in a form that cannot be apprehended.
all dharmas are equally imaginary [F.205.a] with a nature that cannot be apprehended.
this is because upon analysis there is no movement of breath in and out because the body is empty like space.
“Because applied and sustained thought is unfindable”— P18k P25k
it says this because the two, applied and sustained thought, occasion words, because it is said, “Having applied their mind and thought in a sustained way earlier, later on they deliver a speech.”1317
“Because the feeling, perception, volitional factors, and consciousness aggregates are unfindable.” P18k P25k
Because they have no form they are in their nature just a collection of names.1318
Because all phenomena are separated from going.
Because all dharmas appear as an extreme purity they do not arise and are not stopped, and hence appear to have come to an end.
All dharmas are empty. They appear as not arising and as not stopping.
It1320 knows that the time of deaths and rebirths appear based on false imagination, not ultimately.
“Because a dream that has been seen cannot be apprehended.”1321 P18k P25k
Just as that thing existent in a dream which has been seen in a dream [F.205.b] cannot be apprehended and does not exist, so too all phenomena are there as nonexistent things.1322
“This is a perfection without purification… because the presence of defilement cannot be apprehended.”1323 P18k P25k
There can be purification if there is defilement, but all phenomena are pure in their nature so there is no defilement and there is no purification either.
“This is a perfection that does not stand… because all phenomena cannot be apprehended.” P18k P25k
Because all phenomena cannot be apprehended they therefore are not apprehended as standing anywhere.
All phenomena are the intrinsic nature of unmistaken suchness, which is to say, they make manifest that unmistaken intrinsic nature so they make available the wisdom that knows “all phenomena are calm.”1324
“Because the causal sign of greed cannot be apprehended.” P18k P25k
There is no causal sign that is a basis to become attached to.
Because the causal sign that serves as a cause of hate does not exist.
“This perfection of wisdom is a perfection that is not a means of measurement… because all phenomena do not fully arise.” P18k P25k
It might be supposed that all phenomena are caused to fully arise on account of a means of measurement.1325 But this perfection of wisdom does not see the emergence of a basis for the measurement of any phenomenon, therefore it is “not a means of measurement.”
Because all dharmas are isolated.
“Because the measure of all phenomena cannot be apprehended.” P18k P25k
There might be a means of measurement were there something to be measured.1326 But because a means of measurement of all phenomena, were there to be something measured, cannot be apprehended and does not exist, therefore something to be measured does not exist either.
All phenomena, similar to space, are without attachment.
“This… is an impermanent perfection P18k P25k
Because all dharmas are unproduced, like horns on a rabbit and so on, they are not destroyed. Therefore, they do not exist. They are impermanent because they are not existent things, because scripture says that “the meaning of a nonexistent thing is the meaning of impermanence.”1327
All phenomena are not suitable to be clung to, or to be stayed with, or to be made use of, so it is suffering.1328
“This… is a perfection of the empty1329… because an intrinsic nature of all phenomena cannot be apprehended.” P18k P25k
Those intrinsic natures—easily breakable, experience,1330 and so on—do not ultimately exist. Therefore, those phenomena are empty of those intrinsic natures.
“This… is a selfless perfection… because all phenomena are not settled down on.” P18k P25k
The “phenomena,” form and so on, do not exist. They are therefore not suitable to be “settled down on.” Since that is the case, the nonexistence of all the phenomena is selflessness. Even though there is no difference in the meaning of emptiness and selflessness, based on being designated they are differentiated. “The empty” is being without something else. To illustrate, you say “an empty pot” when it has no water. Similarly, because they are without an intrinsic nature, their “defining mark” and so on, those phenomena are thought of as “empty.” As for “selfless,” it is the nonexistence of the phenomena, like, to illustrate, the magically produced illusion of elephants and so on. You say “empty” when you want to say those phenomena are separated from their defining marks and so on. You say “selfless” when you want to say that “they are not existent”—they are not existent things.
“Because all phenomena [F.206.b] have no causal sign.” P18k P25k
Given that a causal sign is a defining mark and there is no such defining mark they are
“Because the emptiness of emptiness cannot be apprehended.” P18k P25k
This means there is just no second emptiness in emptiness. The empty is said to be “emptiness.” An “empty” that is a different attribute called “emptiness” does not exist at all.
“The great emptiness cannot be apprehended.” P18k P25k
“Great emptiness” is said of the immensity of just the nonexistence of forms for all the directions. A different attribute called “the great emptiness” does not exist at all.
You should construe them all like this as well.1331
“This… is a perfection that is the emptiness of a basic nature… because compounded and uncompounded dharmas cannot be apprehended.” P18k P25k
This means if compounded and uncompounded dharmas were findable, their basic nature would be not empty, but all dharmas are empty, hence their “emptiness of a basic nature.”
“This… is a perfection that is giving… because miserliness cannot be apprehended.” P18k P25k
The miserliness that cannot be apprehended in the perfection of wisdom is the mark of giving.
You should construe the others like this as well.1332
“This… is a perfection that is the ten powers… because all the aspects of all dharmas cannot be apprehended.”1333 P18k P25k
All the aspects of all dharmas would fall within the range of the ten knowledges—the power that is knowledge of the possible and impossible and so on. But they are not within their range, they are unreal aspects. So, because those aspects do not ultimately exist, therefore the aspects that serve as the objects of the ten powers are seen not to exist, hence it is “a perfection that is the ten powers.”
The knowledge of path aspects of bodhisattvas [F.207.a] is not cowed by any phenomenon. Therefore, the knowledge of path aspects, which in its nature is uncowed by anything, is
“a perfection that is fearlessness.” P18k P25k
Because the knowledge of bodhisattvas is totally unattached and unimpeded, therefore it is
“a perfection that is detailed and thorough knowledge.” P18k P25k
“Because it has gone beyond all śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha attributes.” P18k P25k
Because śrāvakas and so on do not have this perfection of wisdom it is therefore counted as
“a perfection that is the… attributes of a buddha.” P18k P25k
“This… is a perfection that is the realized one… because what has been spoken by all the buddhas is reality.”1335 P25k
By a creative explanation, the realized one is so called because of having spoken thus, which is to say, the perfection of wisdom that observes thus—what has been spoken by all the buddhas—is called the “perfection that is the realized one.”
“This… is a perfection that is self-originated… because it is in control of all dharmas.” P18k P25k
Because all dharmas are under its control, therefore it predominates among all dharmas so it is a “self-originated perfection.”1336
Explanation of Chapters 39 to 42
Absence of a practice and signs of completion
It is easy to explain Śatakratu’s praise passage, the elder Śāriputra passage, and the Lord’s rejoicing passage so they are just as they are in the Sūtra.1337
“When practicing the perfection of wisdom [they] do not stand in form, and when they do not stand in form they practice the yoga of form.”1338 P18k P25k
The bodhisattvas’ transcendental knowledge of a knower of path aspects does not stand in any phenomenon, therefore just that not standing is their “practice of the yoga.”
The earlier subsection of the passage refutes standing; here it refutes what is established by not standing.1340
and so on, teaches that they do not apprehend it in any of the three time periods.
It says this because “the depth” is falsely imagined, so form itself ultimately does not exist.
The interpretation of the depth subsection, hard to fathom subsection, and immeasurable subsection; the Śatakratu passage and obtaining a prediction; the wilderness analogy, the spring analogy, and the pregnant woman analogy; and the passage on taking care of and teaching others is easy.1342
There are two signs that
“the meditation on the perfection of wisdom… is completed”— P18k P25k
when they
“do not see… an increase… or a decline in” P25k
That the inconceivable has been taught and that they do not conceptualize the inconceivable are also signs that
“the meditation on the perfection of wisdom… is completed.”1344 P18k P25k
The sign that they are practicing the six perfections is that they1345
“do not mentally construct and do not conceive of form, do not mentally construct and do not conceive of a causal sign of form, and do not mentally construct and do not conceive of an intrinsic nature of form.” P18k P25k
With the meditative stabilization on emptiness they do not mentally construct dharmas; with the meditative stabilization on signlessness they do not mentally construct causal signs; and with the meditative stabilization on wishlessness they do not mentally construct an intrinsic nature. They do not conceptualize falsely imagined phenomena; they do not conceptualize dependent phenomena.
Earlier1346 it said that it is deep because of the depth of suchness; here, having superimposed the mark of suchness onto form and so on, and saying that it is deep, is because of the various dispositions of trainees.
It says this having in mind that there are many obstacles to something excellent.
Next, the explanation of the teaching about the merit from reciting the good Dharma is easy.1349
Last of the five hundreds
a “five hundred” incorporates five one hundreds. It is said that the time the doctrine of the Tathāgata lasts is five thousand years. If you break up and subdivide the five thousand years into five-hundred-year periods, there are ten five hundreds. For these there are ten chapters:1351 first, three chapters (the Understanding chapter, Practice chapter, and Scripture chapter). There the Understanding chapter is again subdivided into three chapters (the Worthy One chapter, Non-returner chapter, and stream enterer chapter); the Practice chapter too is subdivided into three chapters (the Insight chapter, Meditative Stabilization chapter, and Morality chapter); and the Scripture chapter is also subdivided into three (the Abhidharma chapter, Sūtra chapter, and Vinaya chapter). These nine chapters and the Mere Signs chapter1352 are the ten chapters.
There, each of the ten chapters lasts five hundred years, so, the ten chapters comprise ten five hundreds that become the five thousand years.
There, in the first of all the five hundreds are the worthy ones; in the second five hundred, the non-returners; in the third, the stream enterers; in the fourth five hundred, insight; in the fifth, meditative stabilization; in the sixth, morality; in the seventh, the abhidharma; in the eighth, the sūtras; in the ninth, the vinaya; and in the tenth five hundred, a mere sign. It is just this that is called “the last of the five hundreds.”
Some say1353 “the measure of a human lifespan can be one hundred years. There in the earlier fifty years the color, shape, strength, [F.208.b] intellect and so on increase, and in the later fifty years they wane. Similarly, the end of the time period, the time of the waning of the teaching, is like the later fifty years and hence is labeled ‘the last of the five hundreds.’ ”
*When formulated like that,1354 the duration of the lasting of the Tathāgata’s teaching is two thousand five hundred years. The two commentaries appear to be contradictory. Śāntarakṣita’s intention is that the good Dharma lasts from the Worthy One chapter up to the Meditative Stabilization chapter. There is the explanation in the explanatory tradition and there is this other expanation. In general there is agreement on five thousand years.*1355
Explanation of the work of Māra
it becomes an impediment; and,
bodhisattvas become arrogant and act with disrespect. There is
and being arrogant;
laughing or joking with each other when the Dharma is being explained; and
when they make the other want to laugh.
they do it to protect each other’s minds; they do not do it out of faith. There is also the reading “attached to other readings while not knowing what the meaning is.”
in regard to these five, yawning and so on,1360 the earlier five are when they are writing it out; here it is when they are taking it up in their minds.
They have to practice the yoga of the perfection of wisdom again for as many eons as the thoughts they have to leave, because they do not reach maturity for that many eons, since their thought is confused.
To illustrate, if you get rid of the root of a tree you will not get
as the outcome you aim for. Similarly, without the tree of the knowledge of all aspects you will not get śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas that are like the branches and leaves and so on. That is the meaning.
Connect this here in the same way: it is just as
its master’s tasty
that is easy to get, and go looking for
that it either does not get, or only gets a bit of.
Similarly, connect this in the same way: it is just as when
rejects it, and makes the absurd statement, “I am interested in
of the elephant, I am not interested in the elephant.” [F.209.a]
The illustration of
and the analogy of the
“contractor who wants to build a Vaijayanta palace” P18k P25k
who looks for a
thinking a Vaijayanta palace is also just that measure, are similar.
“Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom does not give confidence to speak”1363 P18k
because it does not conceptualize;
because it is beyond the range of speculative thought;
because it is thoroughly established as a final outcome that does not alter;
“is without defilement and without purification” P18k P25k
because it is pure in its basic nature;
because it is always in meditative equipoise;
because it is self-reflexive analytic knowledge;
because it is beyond language;
because it is beyond applied thought and sustained thought; and
“cannot be apprehended” P18k P25k
because it is separated from apprehending anything as an existent thing. If they
“form the notion ‘this deep perfection of wisdom is not an existent thing,’ Subhūti, they should know that this too is the work of Māra.”1364 P18k P25k
If they explain the perfection of wisdom with the notion that it does not exist, there is the fault of not honoring it.
“The perfection of wisdom is without letters,”1365 P18k P25k
because it is not something that can be spoken out loud and is not something that can be heard.1366
Revealing this world
“Subhūti… this deep perfection of wisdom gives birth to a tathāgata’s ten powers,” P18k P25k
and so on,1368 teaches that it gives birth to the ultimate tathāgata because it gives birth to the buddhadharmas.
it says it “reveals this world” in eleven forms:1369 it reveals the world of the aggregates; it reveals that the basic nature of all dharmas cannot be designated or apprehended; [F.209.b] it reveals the thought activities of all beings and the divisions and so on;1370 it reveals the suchness of all phenomena; it reveals that the mark of all phenomena is no mark; it reveals the power of being cognizant of what has been done, and acknowledging what has been done,1371 and the nonexistence of one who knows and the nonexistence of one who sees; it reveals all unseen dharmas; and1372 it reveals the power of one who knows, one who understands, one who is aware of, and one who reveals a description of the world as empty, and who reveals this world as inconceivable and isolated, without an interior and so on, and at peace on account of the nonexistence of a perception of this world or the world beyond.
Among those,
“Subhūti, the Tathāgata has said that the five aggregates are the world… the perfection of wisdom does not reveal those five aggregates as being destroyed, nor does it reveal them as being really destroyed.”1373 P18k P25k
The perfection of wisdom sees only the suchness of the aggregates, not the falsely imagined aggregates. Take “destroyed” and “really destroyed” as getting used up and becoming ruined.
“If even this very perfection of wisdom does not exist and is not apprehended in this deep perfection of wisdom, how could form ever exist or be apprehended?”1374 P18k P25k
This means that if even this very perfection of wisdom does not appear to the nonconceptual perfection of wisdom when an apprehended and an apprehender have become equally the same, it goes without saying form and so on do not.
“Subhūti, the tathāgatas know those collected thoughts and distracted thoughts of those beings for what they are through the true nature of dharmas.”1375 P18k P25k
To “know collected thoughts and distracted thoughts” is to know collected thoughts and distracted thoughts as not what they are, as nonexistent, by seeing the true dharmic nature of thought. [F.210.a] Then it says,
And it teaches that they are
and so on, saying to “know those thoughts” is to know all thoughts as being in their true dharmic nature “inexhaustible,” in their true dharmic nature
and
from an intrinsic nature.
“Subhūti, a mind that is greedy is not a mind as it really is,” P18k P25k
it teaches that they1377 know a thought that is greedy and so on.
Here, in regard to
if there is such knowledge of greed, thought, and greediness, then the “greedy” thought is not a phenomenon as it really is. A phenomenon “as it really is,” a thought that is a phenomenon “as it really is,” is a phenomenon isolated from an intrinsic nature. The Tathāgata has an extremely pure consciousness and has not grasped thought, or greed, or a dharma that is a mental factor, or being greedy and so on, because falsely imagined temporary states when there are greedy thoughts and so on do not exist at all. Therefore, the passage here should be understood as follows: a thought that is greedy is not as it really is, is not a truth, so, having abandoned it, they “know it” in the form it is really in. That is the meaning.
What is this teaching? [F.210.b] Minds free from greed and minds with greediness are not only ultimately nonexistent, you cannot even say about a temporary state of a falsely imagined nature free from greed that “it is greedy,” because the two—free from greed and greedy—are impossible in one thought; two thoughts do not arise simultaneously. Therefore, not only is it unreal, but even in a falsely imagined form a mind free from greed cannot properly be “greedy,” so it says “free from greediness.” Similarly, connect this with
and
“Subhūti, here the tathāgatas know that a thought of those… beings is not inclusive, … that a thought is not constricted,” P18k P25k
and so on, teach as follows: They do not view this one’s thought as “inclusive,” or another’s thought as “constricted”; that this one’s thought
or another’s thought
or that this one’s thought
or another’s thought
It teaches that they
“know, thanks to this deep perfection of wisdom,” P18k P25k
that that inclusive thought is a nonexistent thing, that it is does not exist, and that it is without an intrinsic nature; they thoroughly know
knowing it
a nonexistent thing.
Similarly, with
Here also,
“Subhūti, here the tathāgatas view a thought of other beings or other persons as not coming, as not going, as not lasting, as not arising, and as not stopping,” P18k P25k
and so on,1381 explains this. “Great” here is in the sense of arising, in the sense of lasting [F.211.a] for an extended period, and in the sense of changing into something else marked by lasting and having an extended period. As for “has become,”1382 it is in the sense of “coming and going.” A tathāgata’s wisdom does not view it like that; it views it solely as the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature. Since this is the case, it is saying that where “a thought has become big” its becoming big does not exist, so they “thoroughly know” of it that it is a nonexistent thing.
is explained by saying they
and so on. This teaches the following: You can suppose it is “immeasurable” in the sense that it is pervasive or is a basic element.1384 The tathāgatas do not view an immeasurable thought like that; rather, they view all thoughts as having no fixed position and being without a foundation. When they view it like that, they
“[They] view that thought… as without a mark and separated from an intrinsic nature.” P18k P25k
Because it has no intrinsic nature and no mark it cannot show itself, so they view it as
a thought forms,1385 so take it as falsely imagined; furthermore, because that does not exist in itself, it is a nonexistent thing, so it does not appear to the eyes of those who see true reality. Hence,
That is the meaning.
[B21]
they know “clear” thoughts in the sense of those of tīrthikas who make philosophical errors grasping at permanence; the “dull” in the sense of those grasping at nihilism; the “abridged” in the sense of those who over-negate; and the “expanded” in the sense of those who over-reify [F.211.b]
explains arising based on the five aggregates.
means a thought has “been emitted”1388 with form as its reference point, and they have settled down on it and say, “I am form.”
refers to
and so on.
Similarly, having taught that thoughts that have arisen from wrong views have “been emitted” and so on, now, to reveal those that have been emitted and so on from conceptual thought constructions, it says,1389
“Furthermore, Subhūti, thanks to this deep perfection of wisdom the tathāgatas know form. How do they know form? They know it just as they know suchness—without distortion, without conceptualization,” P18k P25k
and so on. In six different ways they know all phenomena in their nature as “suchness.” There they know that they are “without distortion,” because of unaltered suchness; “without conceptualization,” because of unmistaken suchness;
“without a causal sign,” P18k P25k
because of the very limit of reality;
because there is no illumination;
because they are isolated from an intrinsic nature;
because of the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature.
Now, because all phenomena with outflows and without outflows, that are ordinary and extraordinary, and all superior persons and all superior dharmas, even the tathāgatas, are not broken apart in suchness, with
“therefore, Subhūti, the suchness of thoughts… that are clear, dull, abridged, and expanded is the suchness of the aggregates, constituents, sense fields, dependent origination,” P18k P25k
and so on, it reveals that as suchness, their intrinsic nature, all phenomena are not different.
Explanation of Chapters 43 to 45
Marks
The separation from falsely imagined phenomena that are the objects in the range of fools is “marked by emptiness.” The absence and total extinguishing of the causal signs of mental construction and conceptual thought projections is
“marked by signlessness.” P18k P25k
Not joining up later with what has been wished for, because all conceptualized wishes have been forsaken, is
“marked by wishlessness.” P18k P25k
The uncompounded state is
because all thought constructions conceiving of cause, condition, and result are severed. It is separated from production and so on. The absolutely purified state when there is a transformation of the basis through the four transformations is1391
“marked by the absence of defilement and the absence of purification.” P18k P25k
Like an illusion, a dream, a mirage, and so on, which are not thoroughly established and are nonexistent, a nonexistent thing is
“marked by the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature.” P18k P25k
What has no standing anywhere, like space separated from all false imagination and thought construction, ultimately inexpressible, is
Because a prior limit, a later limit, and a middle1392 have been abandoned, the natural state of nirvāṇa separated from an existent thing and a nonexistent thing is
“marked by the absence of annihilation and of going on and on forever.” P18k
The nondual state separated from difference and unity is
“marked by the absence of unity and the absence of difference” P18k
because all conceptualizations of difference have stopped. The state separated from coming and going is
“marked by the absence of coming and absence of going” P18k
because all effort has been abandoned, illuminating does not exist, and an act of doing something does not exist. Because everything is totally separated [F.212.b] from all of its own characteristic marks, the place constituted by the unmarked is
Furthermore,
says it is marked by being inexpressible.
is saying that it is marked as thoroughly established because it is thoroughly established as being without alteration and thoroughly established as being without error.
Suchness does not know a falsely imagined phenomenon, just as space does not know a rabbit’s horns.
A falsely imagined phenomenon does not know suchness, just as a rabbit’s horns do not know space.
A falsely imagined phenomenon does not know a falsely imagined phenomenon, just as a rabbit’s horns do not know a rabbit’s horns.
“Therefore that mark, and that absence of a mark, and also both, do not have… the intrinsic nature of that which might cause knowing.”1395 P18k P25k
An intrinsic nature of perceiving does not exist because suchness is nonconceptual, effortless, and does not stir, because a falsely imagined phenomenon does not exist. “That which might make known” is consciousness and so on.
is a person or a dharma.
is another person or a dharma.
“Because all marks have no mark”— P18k
because the aforementioned emptiness, signlessness, and so on, and all compounded and uncompounded phenomena, are marked as falsely imagined phenomena is the meaning.
“Whether the tathāgatas arise or whether the tathāgatas do not arise,” P18k P25k
and so on, is speaking about the defining mark of phenomena remaining in the same state.1397
It is called “the element of no marks” because all conceptualizations of a mark are absent.
Through a creative explanation they are called “tathāgatas” because they have realized as suchness or because they have realized suchness.1399
is indicating the earlier statement,1401 “Gods, this is deep because it is marked by emptiness, it is marked by signlessness,” and so on.
“Having fully awakened to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening… [he] has differentiated all the marks” P18k P25k
means that even though they have fully awakened to such a nonconceptual ultimate they still explain the conventional marks for the benefit of beings.
and so on, teaches the conventional defining marks.
Appreciation and gratitude
[The tathāgatas]
for this [perfection of wisdom]. They think ‘We have done this and we have asserted this’ because they realize what they have done and achieved.
they have “fully awakened” to dharmas constituted by what has not been done—that nobody has done. As for “not changed,” they have fully awakened without distortion; they know them as unchanging.
this is the nonexistence of a body, the nonexistence of an interior, formlessness. Therefore, Subhūti, the nonexistence of a body, this interior, is
He is cognizant of what has not been done because he is cognizant of the mark of uncompounded phenomena.
“Furthermore, Subhūti, thanks to the perfection of wisdom, on account of the force of ultimately not originating, the unmade transcendental knowledge has engaged with all dharmas.”1404 P18k P25k
“On account of the force of ultimately not originating” means based on the ultimate being unproduced and unoriginated. It is teaching that the transcendental knowledge of the tathāgatas is the mark of the thoroughly established dharma body and hence is “unmade,” so the Tathāgata cognizes what has not been done.1405
is teaching that there has been no production so there is no producer, therefore it is not feasible1407 that
“the perfection of wisdom gives birth”; P18k P25k
it does not cause seeing so there is no seer, so it is not feasible that it
and so on is teaching
“because all dharmas are empty, ring hollow, are in vain… are not producers and are not revealers,” P18k P25k
that it is true, and in the ordinary world there is nobody who knows such a reality. It is teaching “Still, he,1408 thanks to the perfection of wisdom, has fully awakened to this reality as it actually is, therefore it has given birth to him and reveals the world.” He intends this as a statement of praise.
Because he does not see form, therefore it reveals it. Were he to have seen form, [F.214.a] he would have seen reality imperfectly, like somebody with a visual distortion, so it also would not reveal it.
“Subhūti, when a consciousness with form as objective support does not arise”— P18k P25k
when a consciousness with bristly strands of hair and so on as its objective support arises in somebody with a visual distortion, and then later on does not arise, you say sight has become clear. Similarly, here too, there is the locution
because “consciousness and so on with form as objective support does not arise.”
because suchness is beyond the range of speculative thought.
“Form” does not appear. And why? Falsely imagined form does not exist, like a rabbit’s horns, so “it does not appear”; the true dharmic nature of form cannot be apprehended by any consciousness so “it does not appear,” and because it thus does not appear it is therefore “inconceivable,” “incomparable,” “immeasurable,” and so on.
The teaching about “inconceivable” and so on is easy to understand as found in the scripture.1411 In it,
“all mental and mental factor dharmas are not apprehended”1412 P18k
means cannot be grasped by “all mental and mental factor dharmas,” so it says that “it does not appear.”
and so on, again introduce an exposition of a part of the text that has already been explained?1413 He says that in order to gather a retinue, and also because, having introduced just that, he wants a greater enthusiasm. Earlier it taught that it benefits the practice prior to a buddha; now it is teaching that it does the work of a buddha.
“This deep [F.214.b] perfection of wisdom is made available so that you do not hold on to and do not settle down on form.”1414 P18k P25k
Because from seeing the perfection of wisdom they do not on account of craving come to “hold on to” and on account of a view “settle down on form” and so on—the dharmas—therefore it is put into words as “this deep perfection of wisdom is made available so you do not hold on to and do not settle down,” which is to say, it teaches that it is for a truly great purpose.
He is saying he himself is in full control.
“That knowledge and abandonment of faith-followers, dharma-followers, up to worthy ones, and pratyekabuddhas, is the forbearance of bodhisattvas who have gained forbearance for the nonproduction of all dharmas”1416 P18k P25k
teaches that a bodhisattva’s wisdom is greater. Just by merely having entered into the eighth level and gained the forbearance for dharmas that are not produced, the knowledges and the abandonments of all afflictions that are the result of the path to all śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha worthy ones are completed. Their knowledge and abandonment do not exceed that forbearance. From here the bodhisattvas are totally without afflictions. Up to here the bodhisattvas described as those “who have gained forbearance for the nonproduction of dharmas” are the ones without afflictions.
this explanation teaches that their work has been completed.
Then the elder Subhūti, to engender respect in persons with perfect belief in this explanation and so on, asks about their birth. It says,
“Where did they die, Lord, the bodhisattva great beings who have taken birth here and believe in this deep perfection of wisdom the moment they hear it?” P18k P25k
and so on. Here it also gives an exposition of the three bodhisattvas that make up the bright side and the three that make up the dark side. Those who
are good. The second who,
among humans are good. The third who
are also good. As for the three on the dark side, there are those who are not endowed with having
but do not believe in the explanation; the second, who are also not endowed with having heard and so on, hear it here just because of faith, but
“get robbed” P18k
and become uncertain; and the third, who have asked about this explanation in the past just because of faith but still are not endowed with taking it up and so on, and who later fall into
“the Śrāvaka and the Pratyekabuddha” P18k P25k
Vehicles.1418
Here the analogy of
the analogy of
and then the analogies of
and
are easy to understand as found in the scripture.1419
To teach that when they do not have such a perfection of wisdom and skillful means they fall into the two vehicles, and that when they do have them they reach unsurpassed, complete awakening, Subhūti asks how it is that they do not have those two, and asks how it is that they do not not have those two.1420
At that time the Lord puts into words that not having the six perfections is because of the power of apprehending and because of the power of pride, and that they fall to one of the two deficient levels. He teaches that those who do not apprehend the six perfections and have no pride
The side that is the knowledge of path aspects of bodhisattvas—the absence of conceptualization—is “gone to the near shore.” The side that is the knowledge of all aspects of buddhas is “gone to the farther shore,” because it is the perfection [F.215.b] of the absence of conceptualization. Therefore, it says
Then the section of the text to do with skillful means is in just that sequence as well.1423
How those new to the bodhisattva vehicle train
Having thus heard that those who do not have the perfection of wisdom and skillful means fall into the two vehicles, thinking, “How, then, do they become those who have newly set out in the vehicle and are beginning the work,” Subhūti asks,1424
“Lord, how should bodhisattva great beings beginning the work train in the perfection of wisdom?” P18k P25k
And the Lord, because those who are beginning the work definitely have to have spiritual friends, therefore teaches that they
“should attend on spiritual friends.” P18k P25k
and
means do not, because of conceptual views and attachment to an ultimate, set your hopes on something.
Nine qualities of the doers of the difficult
“Lord, those bodhisattvas who want unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening, even while all phenomena are empty of their own marks, are doers of the difficult.” P18k P25k
which he then explains in detail, discussing each separately.1429 “The benefit” is the intention to liberate beings from all forms of life and establish them in a place without fear; “the happiness” is the intention to liberate them from suffering and establish them in happiness; “the protector” is the intention to teach the doctrine in order to protect them from suffering; “the refuge” is the intention to liberate those afflicted by suffering from that suffering and establish them in the nirvāṇa without any aggregates remaining; [F.216.a] “the resting place” is the intention to explain the doctrine in order that they will have no attachment; “the final ally” is the intention to explain by way of all phenomena, form and so on, the father shore of phenomena; “the island” is the intention to explain the doctrine in a delimited form like an island that is circumscribed; “the leader” is the intention, because of great compassion for beings, to explain the doctrine that leads1430 to nirvāṇa; and “the support” is the intention to understand analytically the places supporting life that are, in brief, eighty-five. Those are the successive contents of the passage.
During saṃsāra, when the falsely imagined and the thoroughly established are as one, are there not broken apart, at that time, when the two are undifferentiable, they are “mingled.” When there has been a gradual transformation through the force of listening, thinking, and meditating in harmony with the extremely pure dharma-constituent as cause, at that time, when the two—the falsely imagined and the thoroughly established—have become differentiated and a transformation into the extremely pure, stainless, intrinsic nature has come about, they are “not mingled.”
and so on, are synonymous with just that.
This is saying that suchness is the farther shore of form because in it the mark of form has been eliminated. Therefore, that suchness that serves as the farther shore of form is not the intrinsic nature of falsely imagined form.
It says this because all phenomena have suchness as their intrinsic nature, not because they are connected with it.
What is intended by,
“Will not bodhisattva great beings have indeed fully awakened [F.216.b] to the knowledge of all aspects?” P18k P25k
It intends to say that if all dharmas are as form really is, well then, with the clear realization of form comes the clear realization of all dharmas and hence the attainment of the knowledge of all aspects.
Were there to be a thought construction of form in the suchness that is the farther shore of form, then, with the realization of the farther shore of form there would not be the realization of all phenomena, there would just be the realization of form alone. But, because it is suchness, there is no thought construction of form on the farther shore of form, hence the realization of just that is established as the realization1433 of all phenomena.
Because phenomena are seen to be like islands, they are “islands.”
Ultimately form has never arisen in the past and ultimately will never arise in the future because it does not exist during all periods of time.
This is teaching that the nonapprehension of all phenomena, because of the emptiness of time, is the ultimate, is viable.1434
This means ultimate form, like space, is untainted and unchanging.
means the emptiness of form does not go anywhere, even when together with thought construction, and also does not come from anywhere later on when there is no thought construction.
means they have emptiness as their intrinsic nature.
is saying that the intrinsic nature is not removed from those phenomena. They
“have the unborn and unreal as their way of being”— P18k
they are not born—have not arisen—through the force of causes and conditions, and are not real things because in their intrinsic nature they are not produced.
they are not destroyed so they are “limitless”; they are immeasurable, so they are
Alternatively, they are “limitless” because they do not go on and on forever and are not annihilated, and “boundless” because they are not embodied. They
“The absence of being taken away from” is because there is no over-negation of what exists; “the absence of being added to” is because there is no over-reification of what does not exist. They
They are “not coming” because they have not come from anywhere, and they are “not going” because they are not going anywhere. They
At the time of the action they are “not bringing in,” and at the time of karmic maturation they are not “not sending out.” They
Explanation of Chapters 46 to 50
and so on. There is no elimination of greed and so on because they are isolated in their intrinsic nature, hence
and so on, the tokens of a course of conduct that is greedy and so on, the causes of greed and so on, the objective supports of greed and so on, and greed and the absence of greed and so on—all these dharmas have come about from mind, so it says
they have not been buckled with this armor, [F.217.b] having apprehended the causal signs of those phenomena. This is the armor of signlessness.
“Lord, bodhisattva great beings have not buckled on armor for the sake of only a partial number of beings.”1440 P18k P25k
There is no partial number at all they have decided on, thinking, “We will place beings up to this number in nirvāṇa.”
Cultivation and disintegration
because there is no agent.
because an attribute that has to be cultivated is nowhere to be seen.
because an attention that has to be meditated on is also not to be seen. This is
means it causes the nonexistence of meditation.1441
“Subhūti, you should look closely at a bodhisattva great being in this deep perfection of wisdom irreversible from progress toward awakening.”1442 P18k P25k
You should look closely at irreversible great bodhisattvas—because of this perfection of wisdom are they irreversible, or not?
“Is the bodhisattva great being not attached to this deep perfection of wisdom?” P18k P25k
then teaches the causal signs to be looked at closely. It says “to this deep perfection of wisdom,” up to
“the perfection of giving,” P18k P25k
up to all
“the emptinesses,” P25k
finishing with
up to
So, “you should look closely” whether “the bodhisattva great beings” are “irreversible”—are not attached to those and do they not stand on those.
Because of their disposition, about
some do not perceive an essential point, some do not believe it, and some do not get attached. They do not get angry and remain in equanimity. Some, because of their disposition, are
the six perfections. [F.218.a]
Some, when they have heard this deep doctrine,
and so on;
it more and more; and listen,
You should know that when they have those attributes they are irreversible from progress toward awakening.
“Should think carefully about this deep perfection of wisdom”1443— P18k P25k
“think carefully” with special insight during clear realization—
Those three statements are governed by small, middling, and big. It means they should think carefully, having come to a clear realization, through the true dharmic nature of
“emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness, the unproduced, the unceasing, the absence of defilement, the absence of purification,” P18k P25k
and so on.
Suchness and its indivisibility
Having said that,
and so on.1444 “Lord, they thus think about this deep perfection of wisdom with a mind-stream inclined to emptiness. Should they similarly think about dharmas—form, feeling, perception, and so on—as well, or should they not?” Then,
the Lord said, “Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings do not think about form,” P18k P25k
and so on, teaches that at the time of clear realization, dharmas—form and so on—do not appear because they are nonexistent things. Therefore, full awakening is not through the dharmas
and so on, up to, finally,
but is the clear realization of their suchness. That suchness, furthermore, is not broken apart. The suchness of all dharmas, form and so on, [F.218.b] and the suchness of the knowledge of all aspects1445 are one. It means that they “do not think about” the dharmas “form” and so on because the suchness is the same.
and so on, teaches that if the knowledge of all aspects were to be something that is made; or that changes; or that comes, goes, or remains; or is in one place but not another; or has a
and so on, it would be a falsely imagined mental image, and then it might fully awaken to dharmas, form and so on. But because it is separated from that mental image, is qualified by space, it cannot therefore fully awaken to form and so on.
Then, having heard this deep doctrine,
with
“Lord… this deep perfection of wisdom,” P18k P25k
and so on,1446 offer praise and say suchness is the true reality in which things are not different.
Because all dharmas have suchness as their nature, and suchness is the same, it is customary to call it one; it is not customary to call it two.
and so on, is just what has been explained before.
Seizing on a causal sign—this is form—it is “taken up.” Over-negating in all respects—form does not exist—it is “not taken up.”
and so on.1448 It is not obstructed because it frames1449 a state in harmony with all dharmas, which is to say, it is not obstructed by any dharma, form and so on, because the two extremes of over-reification and over-negation are absent. Thus, because imagined form does not exist, [F.219.a] the extreme of over-reification is absent, and because the true dharmic nature of form does exist, over-negation is absent, hence it is
“in harmony with form.”
Similarly, for them all,
and so on,1450 teaches that the suchness of the Tathāgata and the suchness of Subhūti are the same. It says “has not come and has not gone” to establish that Subhūti
He has not come from anywhere and does not go anywhere either.
This means they are one because suchness is the same.
teaches that they are also one because of being marked by the establishment of dharmas.
this “unchanging” teaches that it is a thoroughly established phenomenon because it is the thoroughly established phenomenon that does not alter. This “undifferentiated” teaches that it is a thoroughly established phenomenon because it is the thoroughly established phenomenon without error.
it extends over all dharmas, which is to say, it does not exist anywhere at all. Therefore, it says
it is also suchness at all times. It
because it is the same basic nature,
because you cannot divide it into two types.
“Just as the suchness of the Tathāgata is not broken apart, is not different, and cannot be apprehended, so too the suchness of all dharmas is not broken apart, is not different, and cannot [F.219.b] be apprehended. Similarly, the suchness of the elder Subhūti is not broken apart, is not different, and cannot be apprehended either.” P18k P25k
This is teaching that the suchness of all dharmas, like the suchness of the Tathāgata, in its nature cannot be apprehended so is not different. And the suchness of the elder Subhūti, like the suchness of all dharmas, also in its nature cannot be apprehended, so it is not different either.1453
It means that just as the suchness of the Tathāgata cannot be broken apart because it is not two, is not different because it cannot be divided into two, and cannot be apprehended because in its nature it cannot be apprehended and hence is the same, and just as the suchness of all dharmas cannot be broken apart, is not different, and in its nature cannot be apprehended, so too the suchness of Subhūti cannot be broken apart and is not different either, because in its nature it too cannot be apprehended.
“The suchness of the Tathāgata is not other than the suchness of all phenomena, and what is not other than the suchness of all phenomena is never not suchness. It is always suchness. The suchness of the elder Subhūti is like that. Therefore, since it is not something else, even though the elder Subhūti takes after the Tathāgata he does not take after him in anything.”1454 P18k P25k
This is teaching that just like the suchness of the Tathāgata, the suchness of all dharmas is also not broken apart because in its nature it cannot be apprehended. And just like the suchness of all dharmas, so too the suchness of the elder Subhūti is also not broken apart because, in its nature, it cannot be apprehended. The suchness of the Tathāgata is not other than the suchness of all phenomena, and what is not other than the suchness of all phenomena is never not suchness, because the suchness of all phenomena is there at all times. The suchness [F.220.a] of the Tathāgata is not other than that, so it is there at all times. Similarly, the suchness of the elder Subhūti is not other than the suchness of all dharmas so it is there at all times. Therefore, since it is there at all times, he takes after the suchness of the Tathāgata.
Because he is not marked by birth, it also says “he does not take after him in anything.”1455
and so on, teaches that just as the Tathāgata with a falsely imagined nature is incorporated in the three time periods, but suchness is not included within time, so too all dharmas with a falsely imagined nature are incorporated in the three time periods but their suchness is not included within time. In the same way the suchness of the elder Subhūti is not included within time either.
This is teaching: Thus, because the past suchness of all past phenomena has the same intrinsic nature it is the same, and therefore all tathāgatas are the same as well. They too have the same nature as that suchness, so they are also the same. Because of just this—the suchness of all the tathāgatas being the same—the suchness of past phenomena is therefore also the same. And why? Because the suchness of the Tathāgata and the suchness of all phenomena are the same. Through the sameness of the suchness of all phenomena you should know the sameness of the suchness of the Tathāgata. Through the sameness [F.220.b] of the suchness of the Tathāgata you should know the sameness of all past phenomena. Construe the others in the same way as well.
and so on, teaches just that suchness of all phenomena in detail.
As it has been said,1459
Shaking of the universe
the six are
From them, when each has been subdivided into three based on small, middling, and big, there are the eighteen great omens and, based on the six directions rising up and sinking down, there are twelve to do with the directions. I have already discussed them in the Introduction chapter.1461
There that “shaking” and so on comes about from two causes. When powerful gods hear the good doctrine, because of the force of the pleasure and delight that arises they dance around and excite each other; and, because of the force of the true dharmic nature,1462 even the stable world, in order to demonstrate the greatness of the doctrine, becomes a demonstration, as it were, of obedience to the true dharmic nature the tathāgatas of the past have explained.
There shaking is a great quaking in one region;1463 stirring is stirring in its entirety like a leafy tree; quaking is revolving like a fire brand swirling around; resounding is the noise of a long and drawn-out sound; disturbing is upsetting; and a roar is a piercing sound. Alternatively, the earth shakes; all the trees stir; all mountains quake; the big drum of the gods and so on resounds; the ocean and so on is disturbed; [F.221.a] and peals of thunder roar. Again, when they first occur, they appear soft and not forceful; after that they are more forceful than that; and finally they are much more forceful even than that, hence subdivided into three they become eighteen.
When the directions are raised up and so on simultaneously, they become greatly disturbed, as though the boundaries have burst1464 and been destroyed. Hence, they rise up and sink down in a sequence. There when the ground, trees, and mountains and so on in the eastern direction are greatly disturbed it looks like the eastern direction is raised up. When it looks like the eastern direction is raised up, even though the western direction remains in its natural state it looks like it has sunk down. When the ground, trees, and mountains and so on in the western direction are greatly disturbed it looks like the western direction is raised up. When it looks like the western direction is raised up, even though the eastern direction remains in its natural state it looks like it has sunk down. Connect them all like that.
Synonyms of suchness
since a form aggregate that might come into being is nonexistent, the elder is also nonexistent, so it is not feasible that he takes after form or takes after anything else at all other than form. And it is not feasible that he takes after
or takes after anything at all
because suchness is unconnected with being born as well.
and so on.1466 To be a tathāgata is suchness. To be unmistaken is unmistaken suchness. To be unaltered is unaltered suchness. It says “suchness, unmistaken suchness, and unaltered suchness” because the thoroughly established phenomenon marked by the inexpressibility of dharmas, the ultimate element, [F.221.b] is at all times suchness, is not a mistake, and does not alter. The mark of the thoroughly established phenomenon is threefold: it is a thoroughly established phenomenon that is indestructible, it is a thoroughly established phenomenon without error, and it is a thoroughly established phenomenon that does not alter. It is suchness because it is a thoroughly established phenomenon that is indestructible; it is unmistaken suchness because it is a thoroughly established phenomenon without error; and it is unaltered suchness because it is a thoroughly established phenomenon that does not alter.
The three terms—
teach three marks: the mark of the dharma, the mark of the origin, and the mark of what is established.
The state of the dharma1467 is the attribute that is the true nature. It is in a form different from all falsely imagined and conceptualized attributes, so that which is established as the state of the dharma, dissimilar to them, and inexpressible, is expressed by the name “true nature of dharmas” because it is established.
“Dharma-constituent” is said to mark the origin. The “dharmas” are the ten powers, the fearlessnesses, the distinct attributes of a buddha, and so on. The term element means cause, so, because it is the origin of the buddhadharmas, it is the “dharma-constituent,” which is to say, the “dharma body.”1468
“Establishment of dharmas” is said to mark what is established. As it is said, “Whether the tathāgatas arise or whether the tathāgatas do not arise, the true nature of dharmas and establishment of dharmas are indeed established.”1469 Because it is the inexpressible ultimate, the dharma that is thoroughly established, constantly there during the prior period when it is together with stains and also during the later period when there are no stains, it is the establishment of dharmas.
The three terms—
“the certification of dharmas, the very limit of reality, and the inconceivable element”— P18k P25k
are speaking about what is marked by restriction.1470
Among these, in “the certification of dharmas” [F.222.a] the dharmas are the perfect state dharmas, the reverse of the mistaken dharmas. The certification of them1471 is the state in which they are secure, the state restricted to those alone. Through that state they awaken to suchness at the very first with knowledge at the Joyful level and are certified to fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening, not otherwise. Therefore, it is called the “certification of dharmas” because it is the cause restricting dharmas (the perfections and so on making up a buddha) to the perfect state, because it said, “Those who have entered into the flawlessness that is a perfect state…”1472
Alternatively, the “flaw” is craving for the dharmas. The nonexistence of the flaw is the flawlessness as explained before.1473 The flawlessness in respect to dharmas is the “certification of dharmas.” The “certification of dharmas” (dharma flawlessness) is the dharma, by awakening to which flawed dharmas are cut off.
As for “the very limit of reality,” because it is the “limit” (what stands at the limit) of “reality” (in the sense of true reality), it means the true reality that has been absolutely determined to be at the limit of reality.
“The inconceivable element” is an inconceivable entity. It is not within the range of what can be inferred by any ordinary speculative thought, so the absolutely determined ultimate known by self-reflexive analytic knowledge is called the “inconceivable element.” Alternatively, it is the element of what is inconceivable, because it is the cause of the amazing, marvelous, inconceivable attributes, which is to say, through the power of the body of the attributes of the buddhas and bodhisattvas the amazing miracles appear in the world.
Phenomena, form and so on, do not exist, so you cannot apprehend them. As for suchness, during the period when apprehended and apprehender are in the same state, you cannot apprehend it because that which might be grasped and a grasper do not exist. [F.222.b] Alternatively, that is said1474 because form and suchness1475 are the terms used just during the periods together with stains and when there are no stains.
An exegesis of the clear realization of the dharmas is not given because it is easy to explain.
Sixty bodhisattvas lacking in what is necessary stopped taking hold of anything and their minds were freed from contamination. P18k P25k
Why are those bodhisattvas lacking in what is necessary? It is because, separated from the perfection of wisdom and skillful means, those bodhisattvas practiced a practice of six perfections that can be apprehended and therefore
and so they did not make unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening their achievement. Hence, they will actualize the very limit of reality and become worthy ones. Those who do just that meditation on
“emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness… separated from skillful means… become śrāvakas,”1476 P18k P25k
while those who are not so separated reach unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening.
He asks “why?” and is taught with the illustration of “a bird,” and there is an explanation of skillful means. It is easy to understand.1477
Is it hard or not hard to become awakened?
Then, in regard to the statement,
it is teaching that on account of their particular lineage1479 they have wisdom and skillful means, their nonapprehending awareness arises from that, and with those everything is achieved.
means starting from the first level.
This means he fully knows all the dharmas that have been brought together in a conventional state of consciousness—the knowledge of a knower of all aspects—but when they are investigated with the knowledge of the ultimate, like seeing things in a dream, he does not see any dharma that knows or that might be known.
Here the “pure” is just the nonexistent thing, in the sense of absolutely nonexistent.
“Lord… full awakening to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening is not hard.”1481 P18k P25k
All dharmas are nonexistent, that is, are nonexistent things, so it is not hard to realize that a nonexistent thing is a nonexistent thing. It is hard to correctly realize the defining marks of phenomena that exist. When something is nonexistent, knowing and establishing that it is simply a nonexistent thing is not hard, even though it would be were dharmas to have such an existence and were you to have to accomplish the practice of the perfections and so on to increase the bright dharmas and stop the dark dharmas. But because those dharmas do not exist, therefore even the accomplishment of them is not hard. So, he says “full awakening… is not hard.”
is this: Having understood that the intrinsic nature of all phenomena that are nonexistent things is a nonexistent thing, like space, then, if it were enough to remain silent in that case it would not be hard. But having thus come to understand that ultimately even full awakening to all dharmas does not exist, and yet, after that still making an effort at the practices of the perfections and working at becoming [F.223.b] fully awakened to all dharmas—that sort of thing is hard. That is what he intends.
“If bodhisattva great beings do not believe that dharmas are like space, but still,” P18k P25k
and so on, teaches1483 that if they were not to “believe all dharmas,” because they are nonexistent, “are like space, but still” they could reach awakening, in that case it would be easy,
And if that were the case, even in the world, bodhisattva great beings who have not eliminated the notion that something is being apprehended, who are practicing the six perfections, would not turn back from unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening and would not fall to the śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha level. This is teaching that in fact those who practice while apprehending things like that will not fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening, and therefore that full awakening to just those dharmas by seeing that just those dharmas are absolutely nonexistent things is hard.
[B22]
Having said this, the elder Subhūti, impatient with his statement that bodhisattva great beings turn back from perfect, complete awakening, says,
“Venerable Śāriputra, what do you think, does form turn back from unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening?” P18k P25k
and so on. Here again it teaches six ways it could happen:1484 You can suppose that a dharma, form and so on, turns back; or a dharma other than form turns back; or some dharma that is the suchness of the dharmas, form and so on with stains, turns back; or some dharma other than the suchness of form and so on turns back; or absolutely pure, stainless suchness turns back; or some dharma other than that turns back. Given that it could not happen in those six ways, [F.224.a] what truly established dharma is there that will turn back? This is teaching that ultimately, therefore, there is nothing at all that turns back.
With
and so on, the elder Śāriputra is saying that if there are no bodhisattvas who turn back from progress toward awakening, in that case all bodhisattvas will become buddhas; they will not turn back to become śrāvakas or pratyekabuddhas, having in mind that were that to be the case there would not be the three types of bodhisattvas where it says “the bodhisattva is threefold.” He questions Subhūti with the elder Pūrṇa’s words,1486 and then the elder Subhūti, impatient with the words “the bodhisattva is threefold” says,
and so on. As already explained before,1487 from the perspective of suchness all childish ordinary persons, all noble persons, those with a pratyekabuddha’s awakening, bodhisattvas, and even buddhas are just simply one, there is no difference among them. This is explaining that if, even while all are thus just simply one, you accept that bodhisattvas are of three types, then how, given that suchness is totally without difference, can it be feasible to divide it into
subdivisions?
Then the Lord says to the elder Subhūti that he should know that those bodhisattvas will go forth to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening, and in that context, for the sake of those in the retinue who want to know the defining marks of those who will succeed in going forth, Subhūti asks,
“Lord, how should bodhisattva great beings who want [F.224.b] to go forth to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening stand?” P18k P25k
After that there is the explanation that they stand with a fully complete aspiration and a fully complete practice. The fully complete aspiration is from1488
up to
up to
Then there are the two results from the practice: the absence of obscuration and the absence of seizing.
The “I must produce a balanced thought toward all beings” is from the perspective of the suchness of all dharmas.
“Form will be without obscuration”1490 P18k P25k
means they do not obscure or conceptualize form.
Even in times past there was no obscuration of form and so on and they did not seize it. Having said “it is because they did not seize,” and so on, it then says,
asking, for the sake of those who are uncertain, how they “did not seize form” and so on.1491
Bodhisattvas cause just not seizing on all dharmas to get stronger, not seizing. But even that which bodhisattvas do not seize is not the intrinsic nature of form and so on. Therefore, when not seizing has gotten stronger, form and so on will not be seized on by bodhisattvas.
Signs of bodhisattvas irreversible from progress toward awakening
Then, because the elder Subhūti has earlier said1492 that ultimately even turning back does not exist, and the three types of bodhisattva1493 do not exist either, here, in this part of the text, [F.225.a] he asks about the signs that they are irreversible from progress toward awakening. Then the Lord gives an explanation of thirty-five signs: because irreversible bodhisattvas1494
see without duality in suchness;
have turned away from all;
do not honor and so on other teachers or have a doctrine that is not inferior;
are not born in a place that precludes a perfect human birth;
stop the ten unwholesome actions;
complete the ten wholesome actions;
complete all the perfections for the sake of all beings;1495
study the doctrine—the twelve branches of the sacred word—for the sake of all beings;
are not unsure about the deep dharmas;
are endowed with gentle and loving physical, verbal, and thinking-mind actions;
do not put up with the five obscurations;1496
do not have the seven bad proclivities;1497
act with mindfulness and a clear awareness of what they are doing;
are habitually clean and so on;
are those bodhisattvas in whom the thousands of maggot families do not arise;
have a pure body, pure speech, and a pure mind;
are not needy, are content, and rely on the qualities of the ascetic;
are not miserly and so on;
have a steady, profound intellect and so on;
do not repose their confidence in others;1499
rely on the perfection of wisdom;1500
comprehend the works of Māra;
have gained forbearance for the nonproduction of dharmas;1501
have turned back and are irreversible from progress toward awakening;1502
are not affected by the results of the concentrations, meditative stabilizations, or absorptions;
do not focus on all dharmas, form and so on;
have the perfect four1503 practices of the perfections;
do not resort to spells and base arts;
harbor no doubt about their own level;1507
will give up even their life to look after the doctrine;1508 and
do not lose the doctrines they have taken up.
Among them,
“in regard to those suchnesses, they have no doubt at all that they are not each separate and both.”1509 P18k P25k
This is explaining, based on the suchness of all persons, that the tathāgatas are exactly the same. It means the intrinsic nature, or the intrinsic nature of both, is not the intrinsic nature of suchness.1510
because suchness has no attributes.
and so on, means that if you say there are no attributes and no signs how have you explained the attributes and signs of those who are irreversible from progress toward awakening?
“Subhūti… bodhisattva great beings who have turned away from form,” P18k P25k
and so on, is teaching that just the knowledge, in the absence of the attribute, is the reason they are irreversible from progress toward awakening. They have “turned away from” an attribute of form, from what is a token of form.
know the knowable;
see what needs to be looked at.
An auspicious spectacle or auspicious sign means that just because they think so, [purification] has been done by bathing, fasting, chanting, visiting holy places, ceremonial offerings, and so on.
The explanation of all the tokens of irreversibility is easy.
It is true that not turning back from progress toward full awakening happens just by reaching the first level, but it also teaches a second not turning back from progress toward full awakening that happens at the eighth level.
As for those who “turn back” and are “irreversible,”1513 those who turn back from the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha levels “turn back”; those who do not turn back from the Buddha level are “irreversible from progress toward full awakening.” [F.226.a]
Part Two
Subhūti’s Two Hundred and Seventy-Seven Questions
Having thus heard about the good qualities of irreversible bodhisattvas not turning back, the elder Subhūti asks about the deep places for the benefit of bodhisattvas who want to be irreversible from progress toward full awakening and says
“would that you might also well expound those deep places.”1514
From here on the elder Subhūti asks two hundred and seventy-seven questions about the deep places and the Lord provides the responses.
The first is “would that you might also well expound those deep places.”
The second is,
and so on.
The third is,
and so on.
The fourth is,
and so on.
The fifth is,
“Lord, what are the specific features of incalculable, infinite, and immeasurable?”
and so on.
The sixth is,
“Lord, would there also be a way such that form would also be incalculable?”
and so on.
The seventh is,
“Lord, is it just that form is empty?”
and so on.
The eighth is,
“Lord, does an inexpressible reality know increase or decrease?”
and so on.
The ninth is,
“Lord, if an inexpressible reality does not increase or decrease, will the perfection of giving, Lord, not increase or decrease?”
and so on.
The tenth is,
“Lord, what is unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening?”
The eleventh is,
“What is the suchness of all phenomena?”
The twelfth is,
“Lord, do [F.226.b] bodhisattva great beings fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening because of the first production of the thought?”
and so on.
The thirteenth is,
“Lord, do bodhisattva great beings, having completed all the ten levels, fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening?”
and so on.
The fourteenth is,
“How, Lord, when they do so, will bodhisattva great beings become absorbed for the sake of beings in the three meditative stabilizations?”
The fifteenth is,
“How do bodhisattva great beings complete the perfection of wisdom?”
The sixteenth is,
“How do bodhisattva great beings fully master emptiness?”
The seventeenth is,
“How do bodhisattva great beings stand in emptiness but not actualize emptiness?”1515
The eighteenth is,
“Lord, what is the mark of the perfection of wisdom?”
The nineteenth is,
“Lord, if all phenomena are isolated from all phenomena and if all phenomena are empty of all phenomena, Lord, how could there be the defilement and purification of beings?”
The twentieth is,
“Lord, given that all attention is separated from an intrinsic nature, that all attention is empty of an intrinsic nature, how, Lord, are bodhisattva great beings never separated from attention connected to the knowledge of all aspects?”
The twenty-first is,
“Lord, given that the perfection of wisdom is separated from an intrinsic nature, how will bodhisattva great beings succeed at the perfection of wisdom and fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening?”
The twenty-second is,
“Lord, is it the emptiness of the perfection of wisdom, its state of ringing hollow, being in vain [that practices the perfection of wisdom]?”
At this point there is a subsection with ten questions.1516
The twenty-third is,
“Lord, is the bodhisattvas’ unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening prophesied because there will be the production of all the dharmas?”
The twenty-fourth is,
“Lord, what is the sameness of bodhisattva great beings?”
The twenty-fifth is,
“Lord, when bodhisattva great beings train to put an end to form do they train in the knowledge of all aspects?”
The twenty-sixth is,
“Lord, if all dharmas are in their basic nature perfectly pure, what dharma’s perfect purity do bodhisattva great beings attain?” [F.227.a]
The twenty-seventh is,
“Lord, do they even have to obtain a śrāvaka’s and a pratyekabuddha’s perfect state?”
The twenty-eighth is,
“Lord, in what way will a thought that is like an illusion fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening?”1517
The twenty-ninth is,
“How will there be a realization of the isolated by the isolated?”
The thirtieth is,
“Lord, do those lord buddhas teach the Dharma in the form of a proclamation of the names1518 of those bodhisattva great beings who turn back or those who do not turn back?”
The thirty-first is,
“Lord, given that no phenomenon is apprehended when they have stood in suchness and practiced for suchness, how will they stand in the knowledge of all aspects?”
The thirty-second is,
“Lord, given that no dharma called ‘a tathāgata’s magical creation’ is apprehended at all, who will stand in suchness?”
The thirty-third is,
“Lord, how are they to accomplish the perfection of wisdom?”
The thirty-fourth is,
“Lord, how does the perfection of giving reach completion in bodhisattva great beings practicing this perfection of wisdom?”
The thirty-fifth is,
“How do bodhisattva great beings standing in the perfection of giving incorporate the perfection of morality?”
The thirty-sixth is,
“How do they, standing in the perfection of giving, incorporate the perfection of patience?”
The thirty-seventh is,
“How the perfection of perseverance?”
The thirty-eighth is,
“How the perfection of concentration?”
The thirty-ninth is,
“How the perfection of wisdom?”
The fortieth is,
“How do they, standing in the perfection of morality, incorporate the perfection of giving?”
The forty-first is,
“How the perfection of patience?” [F.227.b]
The forty-second is,
“How the perfection of perseverance?”
The forty-third is,
“How the perfection of concentration?”
The forty-fourth is,
“How the perfection of wisdom?”
The forty-fifth is,
“How do they, standing in the perfection of patience, incorporate the perfection of giving?”
The forty-sixth is,
“How the perfection of morality?”
The forty-seventh is,
“How the perfection of perseverance?”
The forty-eighth is,
“How the perfection of concentration?”
The forty-ninth is,
“How the perfection of wisdom?”
The fiftieth is,
“How do they, standing in the perfection of perseverance, incorporate the perfection of giving?”
The fifty-first is,
“How the perfection of morality?”
The fifty-second is,
“How the perfection of patience?”
The fifty-third is,
“How the perfection of concentration?”
The fifty-fourth is,
“How the perfection of wisdom?”
The fifty-fifth is,
“How do they, standing in the perfection of concentration, incorporate the perfection of giving?”
The fifty-sixth is,
“How the perfection of morality?”
The fifty-seventh is,
“How the perfection of patience?”
The fifty-eighth is,
“How the perfection of perseverance?”
The fifty-ninth is,
“How the perfection of wisdom?”
The sixtieth is,
“How do they, standing in the perfection of wisdom, incorporate the perfection of giving?”
The sixty-first is,
“How the perfection of morality?”
The sixty-second is,
“How the perfection of patience?”
The sixty-third is,
“How the perfection of perseverance?”
The sixty-fourth is,
“How the perfection of concentration?” [F.228.a]
The sixty-fifth is,
“How long a time has it been since bodhisattva great beings with such skillful means set out?”1519
The sixty-sixth is,
“Lord, how many lord buddhas have the bodhisattva great beings with such skillful means attended on?”
The sixty-seventh is,
“How large is the wholesome root they have planted?”
The sixty-eighth is,
“Lord, if all phenomena are empty of an intrinsic nature how will bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of giving and so on fully awaken?”
The sixty-ninth is,
“Lord, given there is no specific feature or variation of any phenomenon for someone who has entered into reality, why is the perfection of wisdom said to be the highest… when it comes to the five perfections?”
The seventieth is,
“Lord, does the perfection of wisdom not fully take hold of or release any dharma?”
The seventy-first is,
“Lord, how is form not taken hold of and not released?”
The seventy-second is,
“Lord, if there is no attention being paid to form, how will the wholesome roots flourish?”
The seventy-third is,
“Lord, why, when they thus do not pay attention to form, do they reach the knowledge of all aspects?”
The seventy-fourth is,
“Lord, where will bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom stand?”
The seventy-fifth is,
“Lord, how will they not stand in form?”
The seventy-sixth is,
“Lord, how will these faults of bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom not occur?” [F.228.b]
The seventy-seventh is,
“Lord, is the perfection of wisdom not separated from the perfection of wisdom?”
The seventy-eighth is,
“Lord, what is the path of bodhisattva great beings, and what is not the path?”
The seventy-ninth is,
“Lord, if the perfection of wisdom does not produce and does not stop any phenomenon, how do bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom give gifts?”
The eightieth is,
“Lord, how should bodhisattva great beings make an effort at the six perfections?”
The eighty-first is,
“Lord, have you said that they have to train in the perfection of wisdom with the perfection of wisdom?”
The eighty-second is,
“Lord, how do the lord buddhas watch over those practicing the perfection of giving?”
The eighty-third is,
“Lord, how will bodhisattva great beings come to know all dharmas in brief and in detail?”
The eighty-fourth is,
The eighty-fifth is,
“Lord, what is the very limit of reality?”
The eighty-sixth is,
The eighty-seventh is,
The eighty-eighth is,
“Lord, how should bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom?”
The eighty-ninth is,
“Lord, for bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom, how long is it?” [F.229.a]
The ninetieth is,
The ninety-first is,
“Lord, will bodhisattva great beings who have practiced the perfection of wisdom, accomplished the perfection of wisdom, and meditated on the perfection of wisdom reach the knowledge of all aspects?”
In this “Lord, how will bodhisattvas reach the knowledge of all aspects?” part of the text, there are four questions in a subsection.1521
The ninety-second is,
“Lord, is the perfection of wisdom something that cannot be labeled?”
The ninety-third is,
“Why, Lord, does hell have a label?”
The ninety-fourth is,
“Well then, Lord, do bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom train in form?”
“Lord, how should they train in form as not produced and not stopping?”
The ninety-sixth is,
The ninety-seventh is,
“Lord, if form is empty of form, how will bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom?”
The ninety-eighth is,
“Lord, why is not practicing the practice of the perfection of wisdom?”
The ninety-ninth is,
“Lord, if not practicing is the practice of the perfection of wisdom, how then will bodhisattva great beings who are beginning the work practice the perfection of wisdom?”
The one hundredth is,
“Lord, to what extent does not apprehending come about?”
From here on down are the second hundred.
The first is,
“Lord, what is duality?”
The second is,
“Lord, what is nonduality?”
The third is,
“Lord, is what cannot be apprehended not apprehended?”1523
The fourth is,
“Lord, if bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom [F.229.b] are not attached to apprehending and are not attached to not apprehending, how, Lord, will bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom complete level after level, and how, having completed level after level, will they reach the knowledge of all aspects?”
The fifth is,
“Lord, if a perfection of wisdom cannot be apprehended, how will bodhisattvas… make an investigation?”
The sixth is,
“Lord, if bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom do not apprehend form, … how will they complete the perfection of giving… and having done the work of a buddha free all beings from saṃsāra?”
The seventh is,
“Well then, Lord, for whose sake do bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom?”
The eighth is,
“Lord, if all dharmas are unmade and are unchanging, how is there an arrangement of three vehicles?”
The ninth is,
“But Lord, the tathāgatas stood in the ultimate and fully awakened to unsurpassed, perfect complete awakening.”
The eleventh is,
The twelfth is,
The thirteenth is,
The fourteenth is,
“Lord, the true dharmic nature of all dharmas should not be made complicated, but has the Lord not complicated the true dharmic nature of all dharmas?”
The fifteenth is,
The sixteenth is,
“Lord, if all dharmas finish as a mere name and sign, well then, for what do bodhisattva great beings produce the thought to be awakened?”
The seventeenth is,
“Lord, you say ‘knowledge of all aspects’ again and again?”
The eighteenth is,
“Lord, what distinction is there between these three types of omniscience?” [F.230.a]
The nineteenth is,
“Lord, why does the knowledge of all aspects belong to tathāgatas?”
The twentieth is,
“Lord, why does the knowledge of path aspects belong to bodhisattva great beings?”
The twenty-first is,
“Why does all-knowledge belong to śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas?”
The twenty-second is,
“Lord, from among the three types of omniscience, is there a difference in the elimination of afflictions by them such that it is said, ‘with its abandonment there is something left over,’ but ‘with its abandonment there is nothing left over.’?”
“Lord, before these śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas have reached the uncompounded, have they eliminated afflictions?”
The twenty-fourth is,
“Lord, are differences apprehended in the uncompounded?”
The twenty-fifth is,
“Lord, if differences are not apprehended in the uncompounded, why does the Lord say, ‘This is an abandonment of residual impressions and connections. This is not an abandonment of residual impressions and connections?”
“Lord, does a bodhisattva great being having stood on the path…?”
In this part of the text, in a sub-section, there are four questions.
The twenty-seventh is,
“Lord, if the path is not an existent thing and nirvāṇa is not an existent thing, why is it taught that ‘this is a stream enterer’?”
The twenty-eighth is,
“Lord, does something uncompounded make the category ‘this is a stream enterer’?”
The thirtieth is,
“Lord, if in all phenomena empty of their own marks a prior limit is not apprehended, what need is there to say more about a later limit?”
The thirty-first is,
“Lord, you say ‘perfection of wisdom’ again and again. Why, Lord, is it called ‘perfection of wisdom’?”
The thirty-second is,
“Lord, if a meaning and a method1528 are not found in this perfection of wisdom, how can bodhisattva great beings practice this deep perfection of wisdom’s meaning?” [F.230.b]
The thirty-third is,
“Lord, why does the perfection of wisdom not do good and not do bad?”
The thirty-fourth is,
The thirty-fifth is,
“Lord, having trained in the uncompounded perfection of wisdom, do bodhisattva great beings not reach the knowledge of all aspects?”
The thirty-sixth is,
The thirty-seventh is,
“Lord, how much merit do bodhisattva great beings make, who have produced the first thought, and who want to fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening for the sake of all beings?”
The thirty-eighth is,
“Lord, what should bodhisattva great beings who have produced the first thought pay attention to?”
The thirty-ninth is,
“Lord, what is the objective support of the knowledge of all aspects?”
The fortieth is,
“Lord, is only the knowledge of all aspects a nonexistent thing?”
The forty-first is,
“Lord, why does the knowledge of all aspects have no intrinsic nature?”
The forty-second is,
“Lord, if all dharmas are the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature, with what skillful means do bodhisattva great beings, who have produced the first thought of awakening, practice the perfection of giving?”
The forty-third is,
“Lord, are phenomena separated from the phenomena themselves?”
The forty-fourth is,
“Lord, is ordinary convention one thing and the ultimate another?”
The forty-fifth is,
“Lord, you say ‘bodhisattva’s practice’ again and again, what are the words bodhisattva’s practice for?”
“Lord, you say ‘buddha’ again and again…?”
The forty-seventh is,
“Lord, you say ‘awakening’ again and again…?”
The forty-eighth is,
“Lord, if bodhisattva great beings who practice for this awakening practice the six perfections… what wholesome root of theirs will be accumulated or diminished, decreased or increased, produced or stopped, or defiled or purified?”
The forty-ninth is,
“Lord, if the awakening of bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom is not available as any dharma in the manner of an objective support, how will bodhisattvas… fully grasp the perfection of giving?”
The fiftieth is,
“If… in a dualistic way…?”1530
The fifty-first is,
“Lord, do bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom for the sake of wholesome roots?”
The fifty-second is,
“Lord, how do bodhisattva great beings who have attended on the lord buddhas… gain the knowledge of all aspects?”
The fifty-third is,
“Lord, those bodhisattva great beings would not gain the knowledge of all aspects, would they?”
The fifty-fourth is,
“Lord, why would even bodhisattva great beings who attend on the lord buddhas… not gain the knowledge of all aspects?”
The fifty-fifth is,
“Lord, what are those skillful means, in possession of which bodhisattva great beings gain the knowledge of all aspects?”
The fifty-sixth is,
“Lord, does a nonexistent thing fully awaken to a nonexistent thing?”
The fifty-seventh is,
“Lord, what is the bodhisattva great beings’ thought construction?”
The fifty-eighth is,
“Lord, if no phenomenon at all can be apprehended as having an intrinsic nature, on what path do bodhisattva great beings enter into the secure state of a bodhisattva?”
The fifty-ninth is,
“Lord, if bodhisattva great beings enter into the secure state of a bodhisattva having completed all paths, in that case, Lord, given that the Aṣṭamaka path is different… how will bodhisattva great beings enter into the secure state of a bodhisattva having completed all paths?”
“Lord, how will bodhisattva great beings reach the knowledge of all aspects without having produced these paths?” [F.231.b]
The sixty-first is,
“Lord, which is the bodhisattvas’ path of a knower of path aspects?”
The sixty-second is,
“Lord, if those dharmas—the dharmas on the side of awakening and the awakening—[are not conjoined and not disjoined… how, Lord, will the dharmas on the side of awakening be those that bring about awakening]?”
The sixty-third is,
“Lord, what are the dharmas bodhisattva great beings should realize, having trained in them by knowing and seeing?”
The sixty-fourth is,
“Lord, you say ‘noble Dharma and Vinaya’ [again and again. Lord, what is the noble Dharma and Vinaya]?”
The sixty-fifth is,
“Lord, should they not train in the mark of form?”
“If they should not train in the marks of those dharmas how, Lord, will bodhisattva great beings transcend the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha levels?”
The sixty-seventh is,
“Lord, if all dharmas are unmarked, do not have various marks, and do not have even one mark, how, Lord, will bodhisattva great beings meditate on the perfection of wisdom?”
The sixty-eighth is,
“Lord, in what way is meditation on the unmarked, meditation on the perfection of wisdom?”
“Lord, how is the disintegration of meditation on form, meditation on the perfection of wisdom?”
“If, for someone with dualistic perception, there is not even the patience that arises in a natural order, how could there ever be the comprehension of form?”1536
“When bodhisattva great beings are practicing the perfection of wisdom, is there the notion of an existent thing or a nonexistent thing?”
The seventy-second is,
“Lord, what is an existent thing? What is a nonexistent thing?”
The seventy-third is,
“Lord, what is duality? What is nonduality?”
“Lord, if all phenomena are the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature…?” [F.232.a]
The seventy-fifth is,
“Lord, how has a tathāgata, worthy one, perfect complete buddha produced the four concentrations that are the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature?”
The seventy-sixth is,
“How, even while all dharmas are the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature, will there be serial action?”
The seventy-seventh is,
“Lord, if all phenomena are the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature, well then, there is no form…?”
The seventy-eighth is,
“Lord, if all dharmas are the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature, what reality do bodhisattva great beings who have set out for unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening for the welfare of beings see?”
The seventy-ninth is,
“Lord, without an apprehended object is there attainment, is there clear realization?”
“If just the absence of an apprehended object is attainment, just the absence of an apprehended object is clear realization… in that case, Lord, how will there be the bodhisattva great beings’ first level?”
The eighty-first is,
“Lord, what distinction and what differentiation is there between the absence of an apprehended object, and giving, morality…?”
The eighty-second is,
“Lord, how is an exposition made that differentiates between unapprehended giving, morality, patience, perseverance, concentration, wisdom, and the clairvoyances?”
The eighty-third is,
“How do they incorporate the six perfections in a single production of the thought?”
“How do they not, when giving a gift, have a dualistic notion?”
“Lord, given that all dharmas are without causal signs and do not occasion anything, how do bodhisattvas complete the perfection of giving and so on.”
“Lord, given that dharmas are without causal signs, how is it that bodhisattvas complete the cultivation of the six perfections?” [F.232.b]
The eighty-seventh is,
“Lord, what is forbearance for dharmas that are not produced?”
“Lord, … of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas?”
The eighty-ninth is,
“Lord, how do bodhisattva great beings, having completed the perfection of meditative stabilization that has no mark, pass beyond the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha levels?”
The ninetieth is,
“Lord, what is a… flaw and what is flawlessness?”1544
The ninety-first is,
“Lord, what is apprehending?”
The ninety-second is,
“Lord, how do bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom comprehend that all phenomena are like a dream?”
The ninety-third is,
The ninety-fourth is,
The ninety-fifth is,
“Lord, what is that amazing, marvelous dharma of bodhisattva great beings that śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas do not have?”
The ninety-sixth is,
“Subhūti, how do bodhisattva great beings practicing this perfection of wisdom gather a retinue of beings by giving?”1545
The ninety-seventh is,
“Lord, do bodhisattva great beings gain the knowledge of all aspects?”
“If a bodhisattva great being gains the knowledge of all aspects, what is the distinction to be made between a bodhisattva great being and a tathāgata?”
The ninety-ninth is,
“Lord, if, because of the emptinesses of what transcends limits and no beginning and no end, a being absolutely cannot be apprehended… how, Lord, do bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom arisen from maturation… teach the Dharma to beings?”
The one hundredth is,
“Lord, if, in that case, in the dharma-constituent, there is no going beyond, [F.233.a] and in suchness and at the very limit of reality there is no going beyond, well then, is form one thing and the dharma-constituent another?”
From here on down are the third hundred.
“Lord, when they have become habituated to the path does the result appear, and do they attain the result or not attain the result?”
The second is,
The third is,
“Lord, how have bodhisattva great beings realized well what marks dharmas as dharmas?”
The fourth is,
“Lord, how does a magical creation meditate on the path?”
The fifth is,
“Lord, how do bodhisattva great beings realize all dharmas that are not real things?”
The sixth is,
The seventh is,
“Lord, if bodhisattva great beings know… all phenomena are like an illusion, then for whose sake do they practice the six perfections?”
The eighth is,
“Lord, if all phenomena are like a dream, where are beings such that by practicing the perfection of wisdom bodhisattva great beings cause them to advance beyond that location?”
The ninth is,
“Lord, what is a name, and what is a causal sign?”
The tenth is,
“Lord, if all dharmas end up as simply that, how will bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom become personally special on account of wholesome dharmas?”
The eleventh is,
“Lord, if all dharmas are without signs, without mindfulness… how do you enumerate ‘these are dharmas with outflows’?”
“Lord, how, in what sort of way, do bodhisattva great beings train in the five appropriating aggregates?”
The thirteenth is,
“Lord, if bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom are aware in that way of those dharmas that are different from each other, well then, Lord, does that not complicate the dharma-constituent?”
The fourteenth is,
“Lord, in what are bodhisattva great beings [F.233.b] training in the dharma-constituent trained?”
The fifteenth is,
“Lord, if all dharmas are the dharma-constituent, how should bodhisattva great beings train in the perfection of wisdom?”
The sixteenth is,
“Lord, if a being is absolutely not apprehended… for whose sake do bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom?”
“Lord, if the very limit of reality is thus not one thing and the limit of beings is not another…?”
“Lord, what are the skillful means in possession of which bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom with skillful means…?”
“Lord, if all dharmas are empty of a basic nature…?”
The twentieth is,
“Lord, if all dharmas are not different things, well then, for what will bodhisattva great beings, thinking, ‘I will fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening,’ set out?”
“Lord, if a bodhisattva great being’s awakening is not a practice of taking anything up1554 and is not a practice of not taking anything up, well then, of what is a bodhisattva great being’s awakening a practice?”
“Lord, if bodhisattva great beings do not practice taking anything up or not taking anything up, do not practice form… how will bodhisattva great beings… fully awaken to the knowledge of all aspects?”
“The ten bodhisattva levels…?”
The twenty-fourth is,
“Lord, what is the bodhisattva great beings’ path on which bodhisattva great beings who have to purify a buddhafield and bring beings to maturity practice?”
The twenty-fifth is,
“Lord, how do bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of giving bring beings to maturity?”
The twenty-sixth is,
“What is the path of a bodhisattva?”
The twenty-seventh is,
“Lord, if all dharmas are empty, how will bodhisattva great beings train in all dharmas?” [F.234.a]
The twenty-eighth is,
“Lord, why are they not located?”
The twenty-ninth is,
“Lord, if all dharmas are unproduced, how will bodhisattva great beings produce a path to awakening?”
The thirtieth is,
“Lord, whether the tathāgatas arise or whether the tathāgatas do not arise, does the true dharmic nature of dharmas not remain?”
The thirty-first is,
“Lord, do they reach awakening on that path that has been produced?”
The thirty-second is,
“Lord, if just awakening is the path, would not bodhisattva great beings already have reached awakening?”
The thirty-third is,
“Lord, if all dharmas are isolated from their own intrinsic nature, well then, Lord, how do bodhisattva great beings purify a buddhafield?”
The thirty-fourth is,
“Lord, what is the bodhisattva great beings’ final physical basis of suffering?”
The thirty-fifth is,
“Lord, are bodhisattva great beings ‘destined’?”1558
The thirty-sixth is,
“Lord, to which group is one destined?”
The thirty-seventh is,
“Lord, are bodhisattva great beings who have produced the first thought destined, or are those who are irreversible destined, or are those who are in a last existence destined?”
The thirty-eighth is,
“Lord, do bodhisattva great beings who have become destined take birth in terrible forms of life?”
“Lord, if destined bodhisattva great beings do not take birth in those places—namely, the negative ones—then where were those wholesome roots when the Tathāgata took birth in the animal world, as you personally have taught in your birth stories?”
The fortieth is,
“Lord, in which wholesome dharmas do bodhisattva great beings stand when they appropriate such a body?”
The forty-first is,
“Lord, how do bodhisattva great beings endowed with the bright dharmas take birth in terrible forms of life or in the animal world?”
“Lord, is a tathāgata a noble being without outflows?”
The forty-third is,
“Lord, standing in those bright dharmas, do bodhisattva great beings utilize such skillful means but still are not affected by those actions?”
The forty-fourth is,
“Lord, do bodhisattva great beings [F.234.b] stand only in the perfection of wisdom but not in other dharmas?”
The forty-fifth is,
“Lord, if the perfection of wisdom is empty of an intrinsic nature, how could all dharmas be included in the perfection of wisdom?”
The forty-sixth is,
“Lord, how do bodhisattva great beings… find and produce within themselves the perfection of clairvoyance?”
“Lord, what are the paths for fully awakening to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening?”
The forty-eighth is,
“Lord, if all dharmas are empty of their own marks, how can you apprehend specific features in all dharmas that are empty of their own marks and make the distinctions, ‘This is a being in hell’…?”
The forty-ninth is,
“Does the Lord, having fully awakened to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening, apprehend the five forms of life in saṃsāra?”
The fiftieth is,
The fifty-first is,
“Lord, if all phenomena are empty of their own marks, well then, how do bodhisattva great beings fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening and free beings from the five forms of life in saṃsāra?”
The fifty-second is,
The fifty-third is,
“Lord, how do bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom practice in order to awaken to the truths?”
The fifty-fourth is,
The fifty-fifth is,
“In that case, Lord, is awakening not a real thing?”
The fifty-sixth is,
“Lord, if all dharmas are in their nature not real things, if they have not been made by buddhas… why in these dharmas is there a distinction made between ‘these are beings in hell, these in the animal world’?”
The fifty-seventh is,
“Lord, is there some real basis called suchness and unmistaken suchness that foolish, ordinary people stand on and settle down on as ‘a real basis’?”
The fifty-eighth is,
“Lord, for someone who sees reality, [F.235.a] defilement does not happen… well then, what purification has the Lord been speaking about?”
The fifty-ninth is,
The sixtieth is,
“Lord, if all dharmas are like an illusion… how do bodhisattvas… produce the thought of unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening?”
The sixty-first is,
The sixty-second is,
The sixty-third is,
The sixty-fourth is,
“Lord, is a tathāgata, worthy one, perfectly complete buddha not in control of the entire range of dharmas?”
“Lord, if, in the sameness of all dharmas, ‘this is an ordinary person…’ all cannot be apprehended, in that case would foolish ordinary people… not have specific features?”
The sixty-sixth is,
The sixty-seventh is,
The sixty-eighth is,
“Lord, if just that true dharmic nature of dharmas is just that true dharmic nature of ordinary people… given that those—namely, form…—have different marks… how do those dharmas with different marks come to have one mark?”
The sixty-ninth is,
“Lord, is that true nature of dharmas a compounded phenomenon or is it an uncompounded phenomenon?”
The seventieth is,
“Lord, if the sameness of all dharmas is empty of a basic nature, then no dharma does anything, so how, while dharmas are not doing anything and are not anything at all, do bodhisattvas not move from the ultimate but still work for the welfare of beings?”
The seventy-second is,
“Lord, are this ‘abandonment’… also magical creations as well?”
The seventy-fourth is,
“And what, Lord, is that?”
The seventy-sixth is,
“Lord, according to what you have said…”
And the seventy-seventh is,
“Lord, if a person who is beginning the work is going to understand the emptiness of an intrinsic nature, how should they be advised and instructed?”
You should know that all these questions have been asked for the sake of irreversible bodhisattvas seated in the retinue and for the benefit of persons in the future.
[B23]
Explanation of Chapters 51 to 55
The deep places
Among these, in regard to
here form is being used as a word for the suchness of form. Therefore, it asks
and says,
What is intended by the question,
It is asking how, given that “suchness” is without attributes and hence is not the mark of form and is not contingent on form either, can you use the word form and so on in “the suchness of form, suchness of feeling”?
Having eliminated falsely imagined phenomena, that thoroughly established suchness that is other than falsely imagined phenomena is separated from all mental images so it is not suitable to express it with the word “form” and so on. This is teaching that the name form and so on is superimposed onto suchness when it has stains, that it is not expressible as just that form and so on that foolish ordinary persons imagine, or other than that, [F.236.a] in order to designate it during that period.
with that “form is deep” they are made to turn back from falsely imagined form. “Nirvāṇa,” the true dharmic nature of form, “has been pointed out.”
“fill up as many world systems as there are sand particles in the Gaṅgā River with the wholesome roots appropriated in a single day … it still would not approach what remains of those wholesome roots even by one hundredth part” P18k P25k
means that even if you were to fill up as many world systems as there are sand particles in the Gaṅgā River with those wholesome roots accumulated in a single day, there would be many parts left over from the one part of the wholesome roots that filled up as many world systems as the sand particles in the Gaṅgā River. That part of the wholesome roots that filled up the world systems would not approach even a hundredth part of what remains of those wholesome roots.1567
“If… separated from the perfection of wisdom [that bodhisattva] were to… cultivate wisdom”1568 P18k P25k
means if, without the wisdom of the knowledge of path aspects that sees what cannot be apprehended, they were to cultivate just ordinary wisdom.
Take
“this perfection of wisdom is the mother of the bodhisattvas”1569 P18k P25k
as the knowledge of path aspects.
Whatever the composition of the merit bodhisattvas separated from the perfection of wisdom accumulated it is falsely imagined, so the merit will not increase a lot.
is a nonexistent thing. Since it is a nonexistent thing,
“they will not be able to enter into the right view [F.236.b] and the secure state of a bodhisattva,” P18k P25k
and so on. He is asking how if they are not able to do anything could that be correct.
and so on. This is saying, “I do not say that they increase merit by accumulating it,” and “I do not say that they increase merit by not accumulating it” either. How then? How should whatever the merit that bodhisattvas have to accumulate that has been obtained always in all respects be understood analytically as “just empty, in vain,” and as
“just ringing hollow?” P18k P25k
When they understand analytically like that, because they
“are inseparable from the perfection of wisdom… to that extent they make infinite, incalculable merit.” P18k P25k
He asks this as an aside because it is contextually appropriate.
That which cannot be enumerated by a word is incalculable;
cannot be measured; and
cannot be delimited as just this, even by the force of a calculation. Its measure cannot be apprehended. All three, furthermore, are particulars of counting.
means
A number, measure, and so on exist for falsely imagined phenomena, but in the emptiness element they do not exist. They are included in synonyms of emptiness. Therefore, there is the word “also,” in “form is also empty,” in order to make it into a particular. On account of great compassion, it is
This means that it is conventionally an “exposition” in harmony with the cause, compassion.
Earlier it explained that just the true nature of dharmas is inexpressible. Now it teaches that all dharmas, not different from the true nature of dharmas, are simply inexpressible too.
This teaches the following: it asks, if inexpressible is an expression for emptiness, and emptiness does not increase because of bright dharmas and does not decrease because of dark dharmas, and if the perfections and so on also have no increase or decrease, well then, on account of what cause will
“the knowledge of all aspects come with the good fortune of fully awakening to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening?” P18k P25k
“they will make a dedication just like unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening,” P18k P25k
teaches that it will happen because of the power of dedication with skillful means.
It has as its essential nature the emptiness not different from form and so on. The inquiry is made so there will be a further explanation.
“[They] should practice the perfection of wisdom like that, by way of no increase or decrease” P18k P25k
teaches that just this alone is the practice of the perfection of wisdom.
Which moment of thought causes awakening?
“Lord, do bodhisattva great beings fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening because of the first production of the thought, or do they fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening because of a later production of the thought?” P18k P25k
This inquiry is in the part of the text to do with the deep places. Given that those who have accumulated wholesome roots will fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening, how will the wholesome roots for that come to be accumulated? Here, do bodhisattvas fully awaken [F.237.b] through the power of the initial production of the thought—produced prior to the first of three incalculable eons—or do they fully awaken through the power of the second, or the third, or the last of all the productions of the thought when they are seated at the site of awakening? In regard to those, they do not fully awaken because of a single thought, because it does not have such power and the rest of the accumulation of merit would be meaningless. It is also not because of all the thoughts either, because they are not suited to accumulation, since they are destined to perish instant by instant. That is what it teaches, so there the Lord gives
saying that when the wick of an oil lamp is burned up, it has been burned up through the power of all the instants of flame, even though each is destined to perish instant by instant. Similarly, it teaches that full awakening too is through the power of all the thoughts, intending that even though they are momentary it is by way of accumulated habit formation.1579
is when there is special insight;
“the Gotra level” P18k P25k
is the highest ordinary dharma;
“the Aṣṭamaka level” P18k P25k
is the path of the stream enterers;
“the Darśana level” P18k P25k
is their result, the level of seeing;
“the Tanū level” P18k P25k
is the once-returner level because it has attenuated attachment to sense objects and malice;
“the Vītarāga level” P18k P25k
is the non-returner level because attachment and malice have been stopped;
“the Kṛtāvin level” P18k P25k
is the state of a worthy one because the work has been done;
“the Pratyekabuddha level” P18k P25k
is a pratyekabuddha’s awakening;
“the Bodhisattva level” P18k P25k
is the knowledge of path aspects; and
“the Buddha level” P18k P25k
is the knowledge of all aspects.1580
and so on, again teaches the deep state.
That is a deep place. Take “that which has stopped will not be produced again” as stopped in its intrinsic nature—the uncompounded.1583 Take “that which has been produced is not1584 subject to stopping” as the compounded. It says “that which is subject to stopping will not stop” because there is not a second stopping. Take “it will remain just as suchness does” as suchness. As for “it will not be unmoved,” it says that because it has no intrinsic nature.
is asking, “Is compounded thought the intrinsic nature of suchness?”
again says, “Because it is together with stains it is not the intrinsic nature of suchness.”
because a falsely imagined phenomenon is not suitable to be described as just exactly a thoroughly established phenomenon or as different from it.
and
are asking if they are a real basis and what is based on that relative to each other.
again says that the two—a falsely imagined phenomenon and a thoroughly established phenomenon—do not exist as a real basis and what is based on that.
This question intends: “Does that thought see all phenomena?” He again says,
because in the state of suchness an apprehended and apprehender do not exist.
teaches that they have not practiced anything at all.
There is “they practice” and a second, “they do not.”
“Has the perception of a causal sign disintegrated because of them?” P18k P25k
This means do they make the perception of a causal sign nonexistent? He again says,
because an idea like “I will make the perception of a causal sign disintegrate” does not arise. This teaches that the habitual idea, such a conceptualization, is nonexistent. through the power of cultivating the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness meditative stabilizations they also cure themselves of their habit of perceiving a causal sign.
“[They] bring beings to maturity with those… meditative stabilizations,”1587 P18k P25k
through the power of skillful means. That they will personally behold emptiness and so on, and bring beings to maturity as well, is the power of skillful means.
Karma in a dream and the waking state
“When [they]… have become absorbed in the three meditative stabilizations on emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness in a dream, do they improve on account of the perfection of wisdom?” P18k P25k
Having set the scene for the deep places, the two elders expound on just those meditative stabilizations that have gone before.1588 Śāriputra asks intending this: If all phenomena cannot be apprehended, then, when bodhisattvas are absorbed in the three meditative stabilizations in a dream, [F.239.a] it makes sense that they should improve on account of the perfection of wisdom. But if the perfection of wisdom does not increase in a dream and does when they have stopped sleeping, in that case there is a certain distinction between phenomena that exist and that do not exist in a dream, and when they have not fallen asleep.
He is asking a question. Then the elder Subhūti teaches that here, when bodhisattvas are dreaming and also when they have stopped sleeping phenomena cannot be apprehended—they are similar in a dream and also when sleep has stopped. “A dream” and “the day” also are just merely constructed in thought. Both a dream and not being asleep are similar. Therefore, given that the two—the day and the dream—are similar, it explains that if the meditative stabilization when they have not fallen asleep increases wisdom, then the meditative stabilization in a dream increases wisdom as well.
“Venerable Subhūti, when bodhisattva great beings have made some karma in a dream is there an accumulation or diminution in their karma?” P18k P25k
What is the elder Śāriputra’s intention? He is asking: if phenomena are similar when not asleep and in a dream, well then, in regard to the giving that is the giving and so on in a dream, and also the result of stream enterer that is reached in a dream, with the earlier of the two is there or is there not the accumulation of good karma and with the later the finishing of the karma?
and so on. He is saying that when “accumulation [F.239.b] and diminution” are other than something real, all phenomena are thus dream-like, so both in a dream and when not asleep that karma and that agent are totally nonexistent. And in that case, why would you say there is an accumulation or a diminution from them? It says
It is teaching this: If somebody in a dream sees something filled up with river water, or sees a dried-up lake, is there an accumulation or a diminution from that? Or is it the case that just as there is both no accumulation or diminution there in a dream, similarly even during the day when they have not fallen asleep there is no accumulation or a diminution at all, either.
“I am not speaking based on bodhisattvas who view things as not findable, who are free from falsely imagining things, but rather based on present-day novices caught up in falsely imagining things. If, when they wake up and think intentionally about an act that they have done in their dream and rejoice in it, is there accumulation of or diminution in that karma done at night?” That is what Śāriputra is asking. He therefore intends a distinction between when they are in a dream and when they have has not fallen asleep.
This is saying that it is wrong, but what is intended? A certain man during the day or in a dream murders someone. When the murder has been committed, if he rejoices in those two actions intentionally with his thinking mind is there more maturation from rejoicing in the action of murder during the day [F.240.a] or is there more maturation from rejoicing in the action done in a dream?
“Venerable Subhūti, karma does not happen without an objective support; intention does not happen without an objective support.” P18k P25k
It intends to say that a murder in a dream is in its nature a nonexistent thing, so a thought apprehending that is apprehending something that is a nonexistent thing. It therefore has no additional maturation.
rejoicing in Śāriputra’s words. So, what is this teaching? It is teaching that if karma does not happen without an objective support, well then, what Śāriputra said before, “If it is thought about in a certain way, on waking there is an accumulation or reduction from that karma,” is not correct. Here the rest of the argument is this: Were karma not to happen without an objective support, in that case, because what is done in a dream has no objective support but what is done when one has not fallen asleep does have an objective support, there would therefore be a distinction between the two—a dream and when one has not fallen asleep—so the statement “all dharmas are dream-like” gets damaged. So, to deal with that argument the elder Subhūti says,
“The intellect engages with the seen, the heard, the thought—something one has been aware of; the intellect does not engage with the unseen, the unheard, the unthought—a thing of which one has not been conscious. There, one intellectual act gets hold of defilement. Another intellectual act gets hold of purification.” P18k P25k
He is saying that novices caught up in apprehending things when dreaming and awake become intellectually engaged because of following after the seen, the heard, and the thought—the thing of which they have been aware—without investigating whether ultimately things exist or do not exist. When the intellect is engaged like that, some intellectual acts have no result, [F.240.b] some have a great result, some have a small result, some are caught up in and some are not caught up in defilement, and some are caught up in and some are not caught up in purification. What is this teaching? It is teaching that you should know that these intellectual acts come about through the force of perfect and deficient life forms, time periods, practices, bodies, sleep, and so on, and from the lack of necessary conditions.
He is thinking that scripture says “all dharmas are isolated from an intrinsic nature,” so karmas and intentions are isolated from an intrinsic nature. How then is it possible to investigate whether they have an objective support or do not have an objective support?
What he intends here is this: From the context, take this not with bodhisattva great beings who view things as not findable, who are free from thought construction, but rather with those caught up in apprehending things. Therefore, it teaches that having an objective support and not having an objective support is based on what is constructed by their intellects.
Then again, from,
“Venerable Subhūti, if bodhisattva great beings in a dream give gifts,” P18k P25k
up to
the elder Śāriputra again voices other arguments. Set aside for the moment the novice bodhisattvas—if bodhisattvas whose continuums have matured give gifts in a dream, for them, since both dreaming and not having fallen asleep are similar, does the rejoicing in and dedication of the giving and so on become as excellent [F.241.a] as when not having fallen asleep? This is what he is saying.
“Venerable Śāriputra, you should ask this of Maitreya the bodhisattva, the great being,” P18k P25k
and so on. Maitreya has given the response to that argument because it is beneficial to the persons to be trained gathered there at that time, or to show that their intentions match his own.
“Venerable monk Śāriputra, what do you think, will this—the designation ‘Maitreya the bodhisattva great being’—respond with the answer; or will form respond with the answer,” P18k P25k
and so on. Maitreya has responded to the argument that the elder Śāriputra, with an apprehension of things, voiced before. For bodhisattvas who view without apprehending things and whose continuums have been matured, giving and so on, and rejoicing and dedication and so on, in both a dream and when not having fallen asleep, are nonexistent like unreal things in a dream, so Śāriputra has asked his question arguing like somebody who does not understand that they are unreal. It is a teaching from the perspective of emptiness.
If persons and dharmas do not exist, what is Subhūti thinking when he says that Maitreya “will respond with the answer” to this? He is saying that he will speak based on words plucked out of thin air, or form and so on, or their emptiness will respond with the answer. It means here that when
are standing as one, who responds with what answer to whom? Which is to say, nobody responds with any answer.
The elder Śāriputra has said: if you have had such direct witness of those dharmas, in that case you would apprehend separately a witness, something being witnessed, and a witnessing.
This is teaching that when he directly witnesses those dharmas, they cannot be apprehended and are also inexpressible, so how is he going to speak about them?
“Do you see that dharma on account of which you come to be known as a worthy one?” P18k P25k
Having in mind that apart from the transformation of the basis, a dharma that is a “worthy one” does not exist, Śāriputra again says,
“Lord, how do bodhisattva great beings complete the perfection of wisdom?” P18k P25k
He is asking: “If all dharmas cannot be apprehended, who completes the perfection of wisdom in which way and for whose sake?”
Then the Lord, having taught that when assisting beings they become, governed by compassion, conventionally, those who have a perception with an objective support, delineates their methods to bring the six perfections to completion and teaches the purifications of a buddhafield.1590 I will not go into these because the meaning of them all is clear.
It is not that all bodhisattvas make all these prayers that are vows.1591 The prayers that are vows come about in harmony with each of their individual different aspirations. It could be that some have fully made a prayer that is a vow but later, because of the force of the beings’ karma, a bit of it might not be accomplished.
Fully mastering emptiness
Then the elder Subhūti asks1593 how a bodhisattva cultivates the three gateways to liberation and cultivates the thirty-seven dharmas on the side of awakening while rejecting the freedom of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas. [F.242.a] The explanatory section following that says they
At the time special insight into emptiness is increasing,
At the time of the meditative stabilization on emptiness,
as for the time when they reach suchness,
and so on, up to
That is what that the text teaches, that something apprehended and something that apprehends are equally the same and cannot be conceived of.
Hence, “not seeing that phenomenon they do not actualize it.” Just not seeing a phenomenon is the cause of not actualizing it. Were they to see it they would actualize it. And what would the fault be were they to have actualized it? They would have actualized the very limit of reality just like a śrāvaka does. And in that case they would connect with their liberation.
“How do bodhisattva great beings stand in emptiness but not actualize emptiness?” P18k P25k
This teaches that emptiness, “the phenomenon that is… to be actualized” that “they do not see,” is where they stand. Again, “not seeing that phenomenon they do not actualize it” teaches they do not actualize emptiness. This “stand… but not actualize” is asking “how could it be known?”
“Subhūti, when bodhisattva great beings contemplate emptiness [F.242.b] furnished with the best of all aspects, they do not contemplate that they should actualize it.” P18k P25k
With just the earlier intention, “I should meditate on emptiness,” those bodhisattvas do not have the intention “I will actualize emptiness,” like śrāvakas thinking “I will actualize the cessation.”1597 The thought “I will meditate on emptiness” is just the intention “I will totally harmonize with it.” Therefore, this means that even later on it is only a meditation, it is not an actualization. Therefore, it says
The mastering of emptiness without also actualizing it is the power of knowledge of mastery.
“When not in actual meditative equipoise… [they] attach their minds to an objective support” P18k P25k
is teaching that “knowledge of mastery” is mind in its ordinary state,1598 it is not meditative equipoise. Therefore, in that instant there is no calm abiding, and because there is no calm abiding the extraordinary path does not arise.
Now, teaching that knowledge of mastery is the knowledge of when is and is not the time, it says
“it is the time for the perfection of giving,” P18k P25k
and so on.
Understand the heroic person illustration, bird illustration, and master archer illustration from the text.1599
is saying “it is amazing” that those seeing all dharmas as emptiness have not, in the interim,1600 feeling intimidated, fallen to a śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha awakening that is caused by meditation on the three meditative stabilizations.
“Subhūti, it is because the bodhisattva great beings do not forsake all beings,” P18k P25k
and so on, teaches the cause [F.243.a] of not feeling intimidated. Here there are a further seven subsections to the passage: the section about engaging with doctrines that are not good; the section about views with a false apprehension of facts; the section about distorted minds; the section about the conceptualization of a self and dharmas; the section about causal signs; the section about the fault of making wishes; and the section on questioning bodhisattvas.
Bodhisattvas generate compassion and are attentive to not forsaking beings, and that causes them, in the interim, not to feel cowed and not to actualize the very limit of reality.
The second subsection is where they do not feel cowed based on the power of generating the thought,1602 “These beings have… for a long time been practicing a practice with a false apprehension of facts while viewing… a self… a being and so on, so I will fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening and teach them the doctrines in order to eliminate their views.”
The third subsection1603 is where bodhisattvas think, “The minds of these beings have been distorted for a long time by the fourfold erroneous perception of permanence… happiness… pleasant… and self, so I will turn them back from that.”
The fourth1604 is where they think, “For a long time these beings have been practicing a practice while falsely imagining a being, and while falsely imagining the dharmas, form and so on, so, having fully awakened, I will explain the doctrine of emptiness for their sake.”
The fifth1605 is, “For a long time these beings have been practicing a practice with causal signs—the causal sign for a woman, for a man, and so on—so, [F.243.b] having fully awakened, I will explain the doctrine of signlessness for their sake.”
Similarly, the sixth is, “For a long time these beings have been practicing a practice while making wishes, and making prayers so it will lead to the dharmas of wealth and the beautiful body of
and so on, so, having fully awakened, I will explain the doctrine of wishlessness for their sake.”
Also, in regard to asking bodhisattvas,1607 if when asked they respond, “They must meditate well on
emptiness… signlessness… wishlessness… not occasioning anything, nonproduction, and the absence of an existent thing,” P18k P25k
taking just those as their point of departure, they should know they will have been prophesied because they will have realized well1608 the mark of the knowledge of mastery. But if, when asked, they respond, “They should reject the meditation on emptiness, and so on, they should not meditate on them, they should cast them away and cultivate impermanence and so on instead,” up to they should know they have not been prophesied. They
“are not like irreversible bodhisattvas who… have stepped onto the irreversible level.” P18k P25k
Those without mastery do not, like those who have reached the eighth level,
“having achieved mastery” P18k
of them,
“passing beyond the Tanū level,” P18k P25k
become irreversible. This means that they are not fully matured just through that.1609 The “Tanū level” is from the second up to the seventh level.
It is teaching this: if they, even without having reached the eighth level where they are irreversible from awakening, having excellently achieved mastery, deliver the response [F.244.a] of an irreversible bodhisattva, would they become irreversible because of meeting the definition of those irreversible from awakening?
teaches the lower levels.
“Those bodhisattva great beings… are few” P18k P25k
means that even though
“bodhisattvas who practice for awakening are many,” P18k P25k
those who will give the answer of an irreversible bodhisattva who has excellently developed mastery, even without having reached the eighth level, “are few.”
teaches the lower levels.1611
Then, the marks of irreversibility, the works of Māra, and spiritual friends occurring in this section of the text are again easy to understand.1612
Questions 18 to 27
This means it is characterized as unimpeded like space. Earlier the explanation was of the perfection of wisdom impeded by the works of Māra and so on.1614 Now,
“Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom is without a mark. The perfection of wisdom’s mark does not exist at all” P18k P25k
says that it is marked as unimpeded. The perfection of wisdom is not the mark of anything else, and the mark of the perfection of wisdom is also not anything at all. This is teaching that it is not an entity that is a nonexistent thing.1615
“Subhūti… all phenomena are isolated from an intrinsic nature, all phenomena are empty of an intrinsic nature.” P18k P25k
The thoroughly established—the intrinsic nature of all phenomena—is isolated from and separated from all falsely imagined phenomena. Therefore, it means they “all are empty of the intrinsic nature.”
“Lord, if all phenomena are isolated [F.244.b] from all phenomena, and if all phenomena are empty of all phenomena, Lord, how could there be the defilement and purification of beings?” P18k P25k
and so on is asking: “Lord, if all phenomena are isolated from and empty of an intrinsic nature, later there will be nothing to be isolated from and nothing to be empty of, and if that is the case how will those—the isolated and empty—be defiled, and how will they be purified?”
Having asked that,
and so on, teaches the following: Even though all phenomena are already isolated from an intrinsic nature and empty of an intrinsic nature, simple folk do not know that they are just isolated and empty. On account of the fault of not knowing, they become attached to phenomena—the aggregates and so on—through grasping at them as “I” and grasping at them as “mine,” and because of that attachment they undertake actions that are good and bad and so on. Governed by that, beings link up with and pass through cycles of existence, becoming defiled by afflictive defilement and karmic defilement. Thus, there is defilement on account of the fault of not knowing. Later, when they have again found spiritual friends, based on having listened and reflected and so on they realize the mark of the isolated and the mark of the empty. Then the aforementioned defilement does not arise and gradually, through putting a stop to the imaginary dharmas, there is purification.
Then to eliminate the doubts of those who think that because it has said they
in all dharmas,
and so on, therefore nothing of benefit comes from the practice explained here, [F.245.a] it then says there is a lot of merit and explains its cause. You can understand the great increase in merit, and the cause for that as well, from the illustration of
in the text itself.1617
“Lord, given that all attention is separated from an intrinsic nature, that all attention is empty of an intrinsic nature”1618 P18k P25k
is asking: if all attentions are isolated and separated from an intrinsic nature, how can they know they are
because when they are separated from and empty of an intrinsic nature, you cannot apprehend any
“knowledge of all aspects, or attention, or bodhisattva.” P18k P25k
Then, with
“Subhūti, if bodhisattva great beings know this,” P18k P25k
and so on, the Lord, not speaking while having falsely imagined a knowledge of all aspects, a bodhisattva, and attention as some other phenomena, without there being any ultimate difference between them, still simply designates bodhisattvas as “not separated from attention connected to the knowledge of all aspects,” just on account of their knowing all phenomena are isolated from an intrinsic nature.
“The perfection of wisdom is empty of an intrinsic nature”— P18k P25k
This means there is neither increase, plucked out of thin air, on account of striving, nor is there decline on account of not striving.
“Lord, given that the perfection of wisdom is separated from an intrinsic nature and empty of an intrinsic nature” P18k P25k
is the second question.1619 It is asking how, [F.245.b] if the perfection of wisdom is separated from an intrinsic nature, will an isolated, empty perfection of wisdom bring about full awakening to perfect, complete awakening.
Then the Lord explains that bodhisattvas are the intrinsic nature of the dharma body so they are a separated state, an empty state. Furthermore, he is teaching that it is not as if dharma body bodhisattvas fully awaken to perfect, complete awakening on account of the power of the perfection of wisdom. They do not become more of what they are thanks to the perfection of wisdom, and they do not become less when they do not rely on the perfection of wisdom either, because they are marked by staying as what they are. He says,
“Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom is not one and it is not two either.” P18k P25k
He means “the knowledge of all aspects,” “bodhisattva,” “perfection of wisdom,” and “suchness” are not one, they cannot be divided, and they are not different in terms of a particular enumeration.
“Lord, is it the emptiness of the perfection of wisdom, its state of ringing hollow, being in vain, being a fraud, and being pointless, that practices the perfection of wisdom?” P18k P25k
He is asking about five possibilities: “Is it the emptiness of the perfection of wisdom” that practices the perfection of wisdom; or does something other than the perfection of wisdom practice; or does the perfection of wisdom practice; or does emptiness practice; or does something other than emptiness practice? And, similarly, about two other possibilities: is it form and so on that practices or is it the emptiness of form and so on that practices? He has asked based on seven possibilities like that. Then, [F.246.a] because those same possibilities are in fact impossible, the Lord does not apprehend the practice, the perfection of wisdom, or a way of practicing; and then does not apprehended even nonappearances; and does not apprehend
either.
Taking that as his point of departure, the Lord gives an explanation of those bodhisattva great beings endowed with the forbearance for the nonproduction of dharmas who have been prophesied.
“Lord, is the bodhisattvas’ unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening prophesied because there will be a production of all the dharmas?”1622 P18k
Is it on account of the production of all the buddhadharmas? Is it because of
Is it on account of the nonproduction of any of the dharmas—form and so on—or the defilement dharmas?
means something being prophesied and something causing full awakening are nonexistent things, so there is no such thing as a prophesy of this or that type of state.
“Lord, this perfection of wisdom is deep,” P18k P25k
and so on.
Explanation of Chapters 56 to 63
Then it goes on to give an explanation of great merit again in order to generate faith.1624 All the glorification passages; the explanation of the good qualities; the exchange between Śatakratu and Ānanda; the description of Māra and the work of Māra; the description of what happens because of it; how one should behave in the presence of persons in the Bodhisattva Vehicle; the explanation of sameness; the conversation about ending, detachment, and cessation and so on; the explanation of the benefits of training; [F.246.b] surpassing nonperfect beings;1625 the Śatakratu passage; immeasurable merit; and then again the Śatakratu passage are easy to understand from the scripture itself, so I have not explained them.
No duality and no nonduality
This is saying that ultimately their thought-productions and those unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakenings, whatever they are, are not different so, because their suchness is categorized as purity, there is therefore “no notion of duality.” The dual is when there are stains and when there are no stains. The two exist as different particulars so there is also a notion of duality. Therefore it says “there is no notion of duality” because they are the same. There is the notion of duality because they are different. Alternatively, as explained clearly in the part of the text that comes below, the notion of duality is of “existent and nonexistent,” and the notion of nonduality is of “nonexistent and not nonexistent.”
Based on the fact that there has been a transformation of the basis, it1628 “will not be in that thought.” Ultimately they are not different so it will not be “in another thought either.”
What does this intend? If a thought is like an illusion but awakening is not like an illusion, then there would be a fault. A thought and awakening are both like an illusion, however, therefore the fault is not there.
A falsely imagined phenomenon is like an illusion, so, [F.247.a] as with an illusion, it is not suitable to say “it is existent” or “it is nonexistent,” and it is also not suitable to say “it is not existent and it is not nonexistent” either. A thoroughly established phenomenon is isolated from all aspects of a thing, so it is also not suitable to say “it is existent.” It is not suitable to say “it is nonexistent,” because its inexpressible isolated nature exists. The convention “it is existent” also exists, so it is not suitable to say “it is nonexistent.” And the convention “it is nonexistent” also exists, so it is not suitable to say “it is not nonexistent.” Therefore, the notion of duality and the notion of nonduality are not tenable.
“Lord, it is because all those dharmas that are defiled or purified do not exist and are not apprehended.” P18k P25k
Phenomena that become defiled and become purified do not exist because the defiled does not exist even when there are stains, because it is isolated from an intrinsic nature, like space. And because that is just nonexistent, something not there before that has been purified is nonexistent too. This is the explanation of “it1631 will not be in that thought, nor in another thought either.”
To “cultivate” is to become habituated; that is untenable because it1633 is isolated. To “analyze” is to eliminate stains; that too is untenable because it is isolated.
Because it is extremely isolated it is not something that causes the attainment of awakening.
Given that the perfection of wisdom and perfect, complete awakening are extremely isolated how will an isolated perfection of wisdom [F.247.b] come to realize an isolated perfect complete awakening?
With
the Lord teaches that were one to be isolated but the other not isolated, in that case it would not be tenable. But both are isolated like that, so there is therefore no fault. When the true reality that all dharmas are marked as isolated is understood, then there is complete, full awakening.
“The way I understand the meaning of what you, Lord, have said, is that bodhisattva great beings are not those who do what is difficult” P18k P25k
means that when one thing is apprehended and another thing is not apprehended, it is difficult because they do not conform, but since all dharmas do not exist—that is, are nonexistent things—they are not apprehended. It is not difficult to understand that you cannot apprehend something that does not exist.
“Lord this course of action where nothing is apprehended is the course of action of bodhisattvas.” P18k P25k
There is no course of action except a course of action where nothing is apprehended.
Then it teaches that the perfection of wisdom is a state without thought construction. That is easy to understand.1636
[B24]
Cyclic existence and nirvāṇa
“How has this division of cyclic existence into the five forms of life… come about, and how do the categorizations of stream enterer,” P18k P25k
and so on, come about? This is asking how, if all phenomena are without thought construction, the cycles of existence and purification dharmas come about.
Then the Lord states1637 that these thought constructions are in error; they are marked by grasping at the nonexistent and by obscuring the existent. Because they are mixed up with them, thought constructions that are greedy, hating, and so on obscure the existent. They grasp at the nonexistent. Because they give rise to them, [F.248.a] intentions to perform karmic action that is meritorious, demeritorious, and so on also grasp at error. Because those actions and those thought constructions give rise to the maturation consciousnesses, they do not grasp true reality either. Therefore
“the desire-to-do” P18k
and greed and so on have what is not true reality as their object, so all origination is not a true intrinsic nature. The “five forms of life”
“in the hells, animal world, and world of Yama, and as a human and god” P18k P25k
are explained as the intrinsic nature of true reality. Therefore, even though all phenomena are not thought construction, cyclic existence is still presented like that.
Also, for purification dharmas it presents all the stream enterers and so on as simply not constructed in thought, teaching that in their intrinsic there is no difference in nature between stream enterers and so on, up to tathāgatas, because all phenomena do not pass beyond the dharma body.
Having thus heard about the true dharmic nature of the perfection of wisdom, Śāriputra’s understanding greatly increases and he says,
“Ah! Those bodhisattva great beings who are practicing this perfection of wisdom make a practice of something really worthwhile.” P18k P25k
It is not worthwhile because it is not a real thing and is not something that exists. With that in mind, using ordinary reasoning it says they
It makes the conventional statement that even ordinarily it is easy to get something worthless, but it is hard to get something worth a lot.
“It is right to bow down to those bodhisattva great beings… who do not actualize these dharmas as being the same”1638— P18k P25k
to stream enterers and so on and tathāgatas as being the same, and to the dharma body and the very limit of reality as being the same.
because space is isolated from its mental image. [F.248.b] This passage, furthermore, is in three subsections: the passage on space and beings being alike; the passage on the armor of space-like beings; and the passage on form and so on, and beings, being alike.
The explanation of isolation and the benefits of the perfection of wisdom are easy to understand.1640
Standing in the knowledge of all aspects
Standing in reality and progress would be viable were any phenomenon to exist, but if all phenomena are not apprehended, how will they stand?
This means that just as a tathāgata’s magical creation does all that has to be done and stands, so too bodhisattvas stand as well.
“Lord, given that no phenomenon called ‘a tathāgata’s magical creation’ is apprehended at all,” P18k
and so on, is teaching that there is no phenomenon at all called “a tathāgata’s magical creation,” and because it is just nonexistent there is no standing and practicing in suchness, no full awakening, and no demonstration of the Dharma, so how can it be tenable that “a bodhisattva exists”?
“Given that even suchness is not apprehended, what need is there to say more about someone who will stand in suchness.” P18k P25k
This teaches other things that are not tenable. It is saying this because during the period it has stains even suchness is comparable to a falsely imagined phenomenon. At that time even suchness cannot be apprehended as what suchness really is.
is this: He is saying there would be a fault if something were to be apprehended and something else [F.249.a] were not to be apprehended. But given that a bodhisattva, the perfection of wisdom, awakening, standing, and progressing all do not exist what fault is there in this?
“And why? Subhūti, it is because whether the tathāgatas arise or whether the tathāgatas do not arise,” P18k P25k
unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening remains, so it is there at all times. Therefore, “standing” and “progress” do not exist at all. This is teaching that standing, progress, and full awakening do not exist at all in suchness.
Then there is the praise of Subhūti, the praise of dwelling in the perfection of wisdom, the worship of the gods, the account of the six thousand monks, the benefits of the perfection of wisdom, the entrusting it to Ānanda, the enactment of a magical performance, the training in the perfections, the glorification of the perfection of wisdom, and the account of it being inexhaustible.1643
“Ānanda, this deep perfection of wisdom is the entrance into all letters, and the entrance into all for which there are no letters. Ānanda, this deep perfection of wisdom is the gateway to all the dhāraṇīs—the dhāraṇī gateways in which bodhisattva great beings should train.”1644 P18k P25k
It is the entrance into those recollections, wisdoms, and meditative stabilizations related with speech sounds; it is the entrance into those recollections, wisdoms, and meditative stabilizations related with that for which there are no speech sounds; and it is the gateway to those doctrine dhāraṇīs, meaning dhāraṇīs, forbearance dhāraṇīs, and secret mantra dhāraṇīs.
“Subhūti, because form is inexhaustible they will accomplish the perfection of wisdom,”1645 P18k P25k
and so on, [F.249.b] means they should generate wisdom having taken the inexhaustibility of dharmas—form and so on—as their objective support.
even while taking the suchness of form and so on, and space, as an objective support, they should generate the wisdom that they are inexhaustible.1646
Then the benefits of the space-like inexhaustible meditation connecting it with each of the six perfections is easy to understand.1647
“[They] do not apprehend inner emptiness as ‘inner emptiness’ ”1648 P18k P25k P25k
means they do not construct it in thought as “inner emptiness.”
because they do not construct it in thought as being either.
Each of the six perfections being connected one with the other, then skillful means and the account of the completion of the accumulations, the wheel-turning emperor illustration,1649 the woman illustration, the heroic person who heads into battle illustration, the local ruler illustration, the river illustration, the right hand illustration, the taste in the ocean illustration, the precious wheel illustration, and then the explanation of the six perfections are easy to understand.1650
“Lord, if the perfections are not different why is the perfection of wisdom said to be the highest… when it comes to the five perfections?”1651 P18k
The idea is that they have no specific feature because they are not different, and a highest is not tenable when they are the same.
The idea is that the five perfections are not different when they are informed by it—namely, the perfection of wisdom—so, because based on it they are just not different, it is highest among them. The
illustration teaches this too.
is saying that a phenomenon [F.250.a] does not appear with a specific feature to a person who has entered into reality. Similarly, because of the force of reality, phenomena have no specific features. You should not, therefore, say just the perfection of wisdom is
teaches that based on the perfection of wisdom they become those who have entered into reality, so it is
Thus, even though they are not different, following the conventional terms in use in the world, one says “this is on account of giving,” “this is moral,” “this is patience,” and the cause of saying that, furthermore, is the perfection of wisdom, not anything else. The
illustration teaches this too.
“The perfection of wisdom does not take hold of or release any dharma.” P18k P25k
If a bodhisattva’s wisdom takes hold of any dharma just that is the fault of settling down on it, and even if it releases any, the knowledge of a knower of all aspects is not achieved, hence it “does not take hold of or release.” Alternatively, based on a falsely imagined phenomenon it does not take hold, and based on a true dharmic nature it does not release.
There is no “do not take hold” at all. The unreal is something that does not exist, so it says just those who do not pay attention “do not take hold.”
“Subhūti, when bodhisattva great beings do not pay attention to form, up to do not pay attention to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening, then those bodhisattva great beings’ wholesome roots flourish.”1654 P18k P25k
Phenomena that do not exist are nonexistent, so it teaches that having comprehended that they are nonexistent things and just not paying attention to them is the flourishing of wholesome roots. [F.250.b]
“Those bodhisattva great beings fall back from the perfection of wisdom.”1655 P18k P25k
On account of the fault of focusing on the causal sign they have attachment.
They have not been taken hold of because they are not attached to the perfection of wisdom. The wisdom of the bodhisattvas is not attached to anything and does not take hold of anything. Thus,
“the perfection of wisdom is not separated from the perfection of wisdom” P18k P25k
means that at all times the perfection of wisdom is not separated from the intrinsic nature of the perfection of wisdom.
If all dharmas, whatever they are, are thus not separated from their intrinsic nature,
“how, then, is the perfection of wisdom to be accomplished?” P18k P25k
This is asking: if all dharmas are not separated from their intrinsic nature, how then, through the wholesome roots and so on, are they to be appropriated?
“[They] do not settle down on form, nor do they settle down on ‘this is form, this is its form,’ ” P18k P25k
and so on, is teaching that nothing accomplishes anything, because they1657 do not settle down on anything. By properly not seeing, just the realization of things as they really are, marked by remaining just as they are, is said to be accomplishing, not something else. This should also be understood from the
analogy and the
analogy.1658
“Lord, if the perfection of wisdom does not produce and does not stop any phenomenon,” P18k P25k
and so on,1659 is asking: If the bodhisattvas’ wisdom does not produce any dharma and does not stop anything bad, what do the six perfections do? How will the six perfections be completed? With
“Subhūti, having turned the knowledge of all aspects [F.251.a] into an objective support,” P18k P25k
and so on, the Lord is saying: they do not complete the equipment, having thought ‘I have to produce something. I have to stop something.’ It is teaching that they dedicate them over to the knowledge of all aspects and complete them.
When they practice the six perfections they should not have it in mind that they have to separate from, and have to produce a disjunction from, the fetters1661 to form. It means because something with such an essence is in its intrinsic nature pure it “is not conjoined and not disjoined.”
and so on. They should not work with the idea, “In my future lives I will be someone with a great body and mind,”1662 or “I will stand, in result mode, in the knowledge of all aspects.”
Take this as the true dharmic nature of form. There is the fruit tree analogy, and
and
analogies.1663 Then,
Just as they watch by way of not apprehending, by not apprehending giving and so on, so too they watch over bodhisattvas as well, by way of not apprehending them.
When they know the thoroughly established phenomenon as just “suchness,” they come to know in brief; and when they know the suchness of form, the suchness of feeling, and so on as uncleaned thoroughly unestablished phenomena, they come to know in detail.
The word “limit” means summit, as in, for instance, “the summit of a mountain.” In some cases it is taken as an end, as in, for instance, “the edge of an ocean.” It is without both of those limits. Limitless in the sense of summit is saying it is not truncated; endless is saying it is “not delimited.” Therefore, it means “the very limit of reality” is “unchangeable reality.”
They are nonexistent things, so they are neither.
shows they know number;
shows they know gender;
shows they are skilled in the ordinary path;
shows they are skilled in the extraordinary path.
“Subhūti… they should practice the perfection of wisdom through the calmness of form.”1669 P18k P25k
Having taken hold of the defining marks of calmness and so on they should generate wisdom.
“They should accomplish the perfection of wisdom by accomplishing a space-like emptiness.” P18k P25k
They should comprehend it as a space-like emptiness.
“They should meditate on the perfection of wisdom by meditating on a space-like emptiness.”1670 P18k P25k
They should meditate on emptiness by just meditating on space.
Wanting to give a specific explanation for each of these,1671 it teaches that the first is practice during the period when there is effort and there are causal signs; the accomplishing is from the first level on up during the period when there is effort but there are no causal signs; and the meditation is from the eighth level when it is spontaneous and there are no causal signs.
means they should make that unbroken and unseparated stream of thoughts, which is to say ones that are connected one after the other in a continuum, uninterrupted, undivided into separate ones, and connected together. They
means until the transformation of the basis.
and the Lord negates that with
and the Lord is silent, and then negates that with
Because the two faults have already been explained, the answer is no. The response to,
eliminates that because the passages propounding the two main options could have raised a doubt,1672 so it teaches that it is a totally inexpressible and inconceivable state.
teaching all dharmas later in a state that cannot be apprehended—
and so on, will.
“Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom cannot be labeled” P18k P25k
means it is inexpressible.
“Subhūti, what do you think, can a being that is a label be apprehended?” P18k P25k
and so on is teaching that hell and so on do not exist because they are falsely imagined phenomena, but they are labeled conventionally for the benefit of ordinary fools.
over-negation of what exists is “taking away”; over-reification of what does not exist is “adding something.”
Training “as not produced” is without over-reification; training “as not stopping” is without over-negation.
is training in not occasioning anything. It is training that is not produced, because of not occasioning anything by thinking, “I should meditate, I should produce something”; and it is training that does not stop because of not occasioning anything by thinking, “I should destroy,”1675 should make something nonexistent.
falsely imagined form does not exist in form itself because it is empty of the defining mark of form.
“Not practicing is the bodhisattvas’ practice of the perfection of wisdom”1676— P18k P25k
not practicing anything is the practice, because nothing can be apprehended.
“If not practicing is the practice of the perfection of wisdom, how then will bodhisattva great beings who are beginning the work practice the perfection of wisdom?” P18k P25k
This is the question,1677 and
“bodhisattva great beings beginning the work,” P18k P25k
and so on,
teaches that those beginning the work do not have a practice of the ultimate, but still they should train for it, so just that training is the practice.1678
This is asking, “Is a basis for not apprehending findable?” An unfindable intrinsic nature is unfindable so it cannot be said that “it provides a basis for apprehending,” therefore it says that it does not, with
This means there is a sameness to all dharmas that are marked as being unfindable, so the absence of a basis for apprehending is not unfindable.
The existent thing when all dharmas are findable and the nonexistent thing when all dharmas are unfindable are both comparable. Why? Because they are without an intrinsic nature. The findable is falsely imagined and hence without an intrinsic nature, and the unfindable is in the form of a nonexistent thing and hence without an intrinsic nature too, so both are comparable as being without an intrinsic nature. This means the sameness of both the findable and unfindable, that absence of an intrinsic nature, is the unfindable.1682
This intends to say that if they are not attached to what provides a basis for apprehending, how will they work hard at level after level and the knowledge of all aspects?
“Subhūti… a perfection of wisdom cannot be apprehended,”1683 P18k P25k
and so on, teaches that with a findable intrinsic nature a higher level or the knowledge of all aspects would not be reached, but because the perfection of wisdom, awakening, and a bodhisattva are in their nature unfindable, as the absence of apprehending gets stronger and stronger there is an ascent from one level to the other and they reach the knowledge of all aspects.
“How will [they]… make an investigation into… all these dharmas that are without an intrinsic nature?” P18k P25k
If all dharmas are without an intrinsic nature, how will they make an investigation into
and so on?