The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines
Chapter 28
Toh 8
Degé Kangyur, (’bum, ka), folios 1.b–394.a; (’bum, kha), folios 1.b–402.a; (’bum, ga), folios 1.b–394.a; (’bum, nga), folios 1.b–381.a; (’bum, ca), folios 1.b–395.a; (’bum, cha), folios 1.b–382.a; (’bum, ja), folios 1.b–398.a; (’bum, nya), folios 1.b–399.a; (’bum, ta), folios 1.b–384.a; (’bum, tha), folios 1.b–387.a; (’bum, da), folios 1.b–411.a; and (’bum, a), folios 1.b–395.a (vols. 14–25).
Imprint
Translated by Gareth Sparham
under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha
First published 2024
Current version v 2.0.2 (2025)
Generated by 84000 Reading Room v2.26.1
This is a partial publication, only including completed chapters
84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha is a global non-profit initiative to translate all the Buddha’s words into modern languages, and to make them available to everyone.
This work is provided under the protection of a Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND (Attribution - Non-commercial - No-derivatives) 3.0 copyright. It may be copied or printed for fair use, but only with full attribution, and not for commercial advantage or personal compensation. For full details, see the Creative Commons license.
Table of Contents
Summary
The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines is the longest of all the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras and fills no fewer than twelve volumes of the Degé Kangyur. Like the other two long sūtras, it is a detailed record of the teaching on the perfection of wisdom that the Buddha Śākyamuni gave on Vulture Peak in Rājagṛha, setting out all aspects of the path to enlightenment that bodhisattvas must know and put into practice, yet without taking them as having even the slightest true existence. Each point is emphasized by the exhaustive way that, in this version of the teaching, the Buddha repeats each of his many profound statements for every one of the items in the sets of dharmas that comprise deluded experience, the path, and the qualities of enlightenment.
The provisional version published here currently contains the first twenty-eight of the seventy-two chapters of the sūtra, and represents a little under eight of the twelve volumes. Subsequent batches of chapters will be added as their translation and editing is completed.
Acknowledgements
The text was translated by Gareth Sparham, partly based on the translation of The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines by the late Gyurme Dorje and the Padmakara Translation Group. Geshe Lobsang Gyaltsen, 80th Abbot of Drepung Gomang monastery, and Geshe Kalsang Damdul, former Director of the Institute of Buddhist Dialectics, kindly provided learned advice.
The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha. Nathaniel Rich and John Canti edited the translation, John Canti wrote the provisional introduction, and Ven. Konchog Norbu copyedited the text. Celso Wilkinson, André Rodrigues, and Sameer Dhingra were in charge of the digital publication process.
The translation of this text has been made possible through the generous sponsorship of those who offered leadership gifts to inaugurate our campaign, The Perfection of Wisdom for All. In chronological order of contributions received, these include:
Yan Xiu, Yan Li, Li Yifeng, and Wang Issa; Thirty, Twenty, Jamyang Sun, and Manju Sun; Anonymous; Ye Kong and family, Chen Hua, and Yizhen Kong; Wang Jing and family; Joseph Tse, Patricia Tse, and family; Zhou Tianyu, Chen Yiqin, Zhou Xun, Zhuo Yue, Chen Kun, Sheng Ye, and family, Zhao Xuan, Huang Feng, Lei Xia, Kamay Kan, Huang Xuan, Liu Xin Qi, Le Fei, Li Cui Zhi, Wang Shu Chang, Li Su Fang, Feng Bo Wen, Wang Zi Wen, Ye Wei Wei, Guo Wan Huai, and Zhang Nan; Ang Wei Khai and Ang Chui Jin; Jube, Sharma, Leo, Tong, Mike, Ming, Caiping, Lekka, Shanti, Nian Zu, Zi Yi, Dorje, Guang Zu, Kunga, and Zi Chao; Anonymous, Anonymous; An Zhang, Hannah Zhang, Lucas Zhang, and Aiden Zhang; Jinglan Chi and family; Anonymous; Dakki; Kelvin Lee and Doris Lim.
We also acknowledge and express our deep gratitude to the 6,145 donors who supported the translation and publication of this text through contributions made throughout the campaign period.
Text Body
Chapter 28
Then the venerable Subhūti said to the Blessed One, “Blessed Lord, [F.194.b] the perfection of wisdom is inactive.”
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “that is because an agent cannot be apprehended. Similarly, Subhūti, it is because physical forms cannot be apprehended, feelings cannot be apprehended, perceptions cannot be apprehended, formative predispositions cannot be apprehended, and consciousness cannot be apprehended. The eyes cannot be apprehended, the ears cannot be apprehended, the nose cannot be apprehended, the tongue cannot be apprehended, the body cannot be apprehended, and the mental faculty cannot be apprehended. Sights cannot be apprehended, sounds cannot be apprehended, odors cannot be apprehended, tastes cannot be apprehended, tangibles cannot be apprehended, and mental phenomena cannot be apprehended. Visual consciousness cannot be apprehended, auditory consciousness cannot be apprehended, olfactory consciousness cannot be apprehended, gustatory consciousness cannot be apprehended, tactile consciousness cannot be apprehended, and mental consciousness cannot be apprehended. Visually compounded sensory contact cannot be apprehended, aurally compounded sensory contact cannot be apprehended, nasally compounded sensory contact cannot be apprehended, lingually compounded sensory contact cannot be apprehended, corporeally compounded sensory contact cannot be apprehended, and mentally compounded sensory contact cannot be apprehended. Feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact cannot be apprehended, feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact cannot be apprehended, feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact cannot be apprehended, feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact cannot be apprehended, feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact cannot be apprehended, and feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact cannot be apprehended. The earth element cannot be apprehended, [F.195.a] the water element cannot be apprehended, the fire element cannot be apprehended, the wind element cannot be apprehended, the space element cannot be apprehended, and the consciousness element cannot be apprehended. Ignorance cannot be apprehended, formative predispositions cannot be apprehended, consciousness cannot be apprehended, name and form cannot be apprehended, the six sense fields cannot be apprehended, sensory contact cannot be apprehended, sensation cannot be apprehended, craving cannot be apprehended, grasping cannot be apprehended, the rebirth process cannot be apprehended, birth cannot be apprehended, and aging and death cannot be apprehended. The perfection of generosity cannot be apprehended, the perfection of ethical discipline cannot be apprehended, the perfection of tolerance cannot be apprehended, the perfection of perseverance cannot be apprehended, the perfection of meditative concentration cannot be apprehended, and the perfection of wisdom cannot be apprehended. The emptiness of internal phenomena cannot be apprehended, the emptiness of external phenomena cannot be apprehended, the emptiness of external and internal phenomena cannot be apprehended, the emptiness of emptiness cannot be apprehended, the emptiness of great extent cannot be apprehended, the emptiness of ultimate reality cannot be apprehended, the emptiness of conditioned phenomena cannot be apprehended, the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena cannot be apprehended, the emptiness of the unlimited cannot be apprehended, the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end cannot be apprehended, the emptiness of nonexclusion cannot be apprehended, the emptiness of inherent nature cannot be apprehended, the emptiness of all phenomena cannot be apprehended, the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics cannot be apprehended, the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended cannot be apprehended, the emptiness of nonentities cannot be apprehended, the emptiness of essential nature cannot be apprehended, [F.195.b] and the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities cannot be apprehended. The applications of mindfulness cannot be apprehended, the correct exertions cannot be apprehended, the supports for miraculous ability cannot be apprehended, the faculties cannot be apprehended, the powers cannot be apprehended, the branches of enlightenment cannot be apprehended, and the noble eightfold path cannot be apprehended. The truths of the noble ones cannot be apprehended, the meditative concentrations cannot be apprehended, the immeasurable attitudes cannot be apprehended, the formless absorptions cannot be apprehended, the eight liberations cannot be apprehended, the nine serial steps of meditative absorption cannot be apprehended, the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation cannot be apprehended, the extrasensory powers cannot be apprehended, the meditative stabilities cannot be apprehended, the dhāraṇī gateways cannot be apprehended, the powers of the tathāgatas cannot be apprehended, the fearlessnesses cannot be apprehended, the kinds of exact knowledge cannot be apprehended, great loving kindness cannot be apprehended, great compassion cannot be apprehended, and the distinct qualities of the buddhas cannot be apprehended. The fruit of having entered the stream cannot be apprehended, the fruit of once-returner cannot be apprehended, the fruit of non-returner cannot be apprehended, arhatship cannot be apprehended, individual enlightenment cannot be apprehended, the knowledge of aspects of the path cannot be apprehended, and all-aspect omniscience cannot be apprehended.”
“Blessed Lord, how then should bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom here practice?” asked Subhūti.
“Subhūti,” replied the Lord, “here when bodhisattva great beings [F.196.a] practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not engage with physical forms, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that physical forms are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that physical forms are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that physical forms are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that physical forms are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because physical forms that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with feelings, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that feelings are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that feelings are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that feelings are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that feelings are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because feelings that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with perceptions, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that perceptions are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that perceptions are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ [F.196.b] they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that perceptions are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that perceptions are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because perceptions that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with formative predispositions, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that formative predispositions are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that formative predispositions are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that formative predispositions are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that formative predispositions are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because formative predispositions that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with consciousness, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that consciousness is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that consciousness is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that consciousness is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that consciousness is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask [F.197.a] why, it is because consciousness that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the eyes, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the eyes are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the eyes are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the eyes are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the eyes are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because eyes that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the ears, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the ears are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the ears are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the ears are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the ears are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because ears that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the nose, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the nose is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; [F.197.b] if they do not practice with the notion that the nose is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the nose is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the nose is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the nose that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the tongue, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the tongue is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the tongue is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the tongue is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the tongue is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the tongue that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the body, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the body is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the body is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the body is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the body is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the body that is permanent or impermanent, happiness [F.198.a] or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the mental faculty, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the mental faculty is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the mental faculty is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the mental faculty is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the mental faculty is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the mental faculty that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with sights, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that sights are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that sights are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that sights are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that sights are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because sights that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with sounds, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that sounds are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; [F.198.b] if they do not practice with the notion that sounds are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that sounds are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that sounds are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because sounds that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with odors, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that odors are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that odors are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that odors are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that odors are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because odors that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with tastes, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that tastes are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that tastes are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that tastes are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that tastes are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because tastes that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with tangibles, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that tangibles are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that tangibles are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that tangibles are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that tangibles are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because tangibles that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or [F.199.a] suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with mental phenomena, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that mental phenomena are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that mental phenomena are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that mental phenomena are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that mental phenomena are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because mental phenomena that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with visual consciousness, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that visual consciousness is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing [F.199.b] the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that visual consciousness is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that visual consciousness is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that visual consciousness is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because visual consciousness that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with auditory consciousness, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that auditory consciousness is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that auditory consciousness is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that auditory consciousness is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that auditory consciousness is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because auditory consciousness that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with olfactory consciousness, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that olfactory consciousness is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that olfactory consciousness is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing [F.200.a] the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that olfactory consciousness is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that olfactory consciousness is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because olfactory consciousness that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with gustatory consciousness, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that gustatory consciousness is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that gustatory consciousness is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that gustatory consciousness is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that gustatory consciousness is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because gustatory consciousness that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with tactile consciousness, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that tactile consciousness is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that tactile consciousness is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that tactile consciousness is ‘a self’ [F.200.b] or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that tactile consciousness is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because tactile consciousness that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with mental consciousness, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that mental consciousness is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that mental consciousness is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that mental consciousness is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that mental consciousness is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because mental consciousness that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with visually compounded sensory contact, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that visually compounded sensory contact is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that visually compounded sensory contact is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that visually compounded sensory contact is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that visually compounded sensory contact [F.201.a] is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because visually compounded sensory contact that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with aurally compounded sensory contact, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that aurally compounded sensory contact is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that aurally compounded sensory contact is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that aurally compounded sensory contact is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that aurally compounded sensory contact is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because aurally compounded sensory contact that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with nasally compounded sensory contact, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that nasally compounded sensory contact is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that nasally compounded sensory contact is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that nasally compounded sensory contact is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that nasally compounded sensory contact is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. [F.201.b] If you ask why, it is because nasally compounded sensory contact that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with lingually compounded sensory contact, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that lingually compounded sensory contact is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that lingually compounded sensory contact is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that lingually compounded sensory contact is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that lingually compounded sensory contact is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because lingually compounded sensory contact that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with corporeally compounded sensory contact, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that corporeally compounded sensory contact is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that corporeally compounded sensory contact is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that corporeally compounded sensory contact is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that corporeally compounded sensory contact is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because corporeally compounded sensory contact that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or [F.202.a] unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with mentally compounded sensory contact, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that mentally compounded sensory contact is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that mentally compounded sensory contact is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that mentally compounded sensory contact is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that mentally compounded sensory contact is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because mentally compounded sensory contact that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, [F.202.b] or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are ‘pleasant’ [F.203.a] or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ [F.203.b] they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the earth element, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the earth element is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; [F.204.a] if they do not practice with the notion that the earth element is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the earth element is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the earth element is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the earth element that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the water element, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the water element is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the water element is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the water element is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the water element is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the water element that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the fire element, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the fire element is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the fire element is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that [F.204.b] the fire element is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the fire element is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the fire element that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the wind element, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the wind element is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the wind element is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the wind element is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the wind element is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the wind element that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the space element, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the space element is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the space element is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the space element is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the space element is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ [F.205.a] they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the space element that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the consciousness element, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the consciousness element is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the consciousness element is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the consciousness element is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the consciousness element is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the consciousness element that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist. [B16]
“If they do not engage with ignorance, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that ignorance is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that ignorance is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that ignorance is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice [F.205.b] with the notion that ignorance is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because ignorance that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with formative predispositions, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that formative predispositions are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that formative predispositions are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that formative predispositions are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that formative predispositions are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because formative predispositions that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with consciousness, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that consciousness is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that consciousness is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that consciousness is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that consciousness is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because consciousness that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, [F.206.a] or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with name and form, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that name and form are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that name and form are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that name and form are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that name and form are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because name and form that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the six sense fields, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the six sense fields are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the six sense fields are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the six sense fields are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the six sense fields are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the six sense fields that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with sensory contact, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. [F.206.b] If they do not practice with the notion that sensory contact is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that sensory contact is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that sensory contact is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that sensory contact is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because sensory contact that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with sensation, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that sensation is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that sensation is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that sensation is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that sensation is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because sensation that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with craving, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that craving is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that craving is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that craving is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; [F.207.a] and if they do not practice with the notion that craving is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because craving that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with grasping, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that grasping is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that grasping is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that grasping is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that grasping is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because grasping that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the rebirth process, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the rebirth process is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the rebirth process is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the rebirth process is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the rebirth process is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the rebirth process that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, [F.207.b] or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with birth, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that birth is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that birth is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that birth is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that birth is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because birth that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with aging and death, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that aging and death are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that aging and death are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that aging and death are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that aging and death are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because aging and death that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the perfection of generosity, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of generosity is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of generosity is ‘happiness’ [F.208.a] or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of generosity is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of generosity is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the perfection of generosity that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the perfection of ethical discipline, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of ethical discipline is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of ethical discipline is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of ethical discipline is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of ethical discipline is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the perfection of ethical discipline that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the perfection of tolerance, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of tolerance is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion [F.208.b] that the perfection of tolerance is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of tolerance is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of tolerance is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the perfection of tolerance that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the perfection of perseverance, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of perseverance is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of perseverance is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of perseverance is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of perseverance is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the perfection of perseverance that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the perfection of meditative concentration, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of meditative concentration is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion [F.209.a] that the perfection of meditative concentration is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of meditative concentration is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of meditative concentration is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the perfection of meditative concentration that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the perfection of wisdom, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of wisdom is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of wisdom is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of wisdom is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of wisdom is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the perfection of wisdom that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of internal phenomena, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of internal phenomena is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that [F.209.b] the emptiness of internal phenomena is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of internal phenomena is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of internal phenomena is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of internal phenomena that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of external phenomena, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of external phenomena is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of external phenomena is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of external phenomena is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of external phenomena is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of external phenomena that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of external and internal phenomena, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are [F.210.a] practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of external and internal phenomena that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of emptiness, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of emptiness is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of emptiness is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of emptiness is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of emptiness is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of emptiness that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of great extent, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of great extent is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of great extent is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of great extent is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of great extent [F.210.b] is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of great extent that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of ultimate reality, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of ultimate reality is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of ultimate reality is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of ultimate reality is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of ultimate reality is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of ultimate reality that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of conditioned phenomena, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. [F.211.a] If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of conditioned phenomena that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of the unlimited, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of the unlimited is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of the unlimited is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of the unlimited is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that [F.211.b] the emptiness of the unlimited is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of the unlimited that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of nonexclusion, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of nonexclusion is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of nonexclusion is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of nonexclusion is ‘a self’ [F.212.a] or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of nonexclusion is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of nonexclusion that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of inherent nature, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of inherent nature is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of inherent nature is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of inherent nature is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of inherent nature is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of inherent nature that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of all phenomena, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of all phenomena is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of all phenomena is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of all phenomena is ‘a self’ [F.212.b] or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of all phenomena is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of all phenomena that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that [F.213.a] the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of nonentities, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of nonentities is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of nonentities is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of nonentities is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of nonentities is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of nonentities that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of essential nature, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of essential nature is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of essential nature is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that [F.213.b] the emptiness of essential nature is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of essential nature is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of essential nature that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the applications of mindfulness, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the applications of mindfulness are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the applications of mindfulness are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; [F.214.a] if they do not practice with the notion that the applications of mindfulness are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the applications of mindfulness are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the applications of mindfulness that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the correct exertions, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the correct exertions are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the correct exertions are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the correct exertions are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the correct exertions are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the correct exertions that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the supports for miraculous ability, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the supports for miraculous ability are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the supports for miraculous ability are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ [F.214.b] they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the supports for miraculous ability are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the supports for miraculous ability are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the supports for miraculous ability that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the faculties, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the faculties are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the faculties are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the faculties are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the faculties are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the faculties that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the powers, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the powers are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the powers are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the powers are ‘a self’ [F.215.a] or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the powers are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the powers that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the branches of enlightenment, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the branches of enlightenment are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the branches of enlightenment are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the branches of enlightenment are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the branches of enlightenment are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the branches of enlightenment that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the noble eightfold path, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the noble eightfold path is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the noble eightfold path is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that [F.215.b] the noble eightfold path is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the noble eightfold path is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the noble eightfold path that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the truths of the noble ones, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the truths of the noble ones are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the truths of the noble ones are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the truths of the noble ones are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the truths of the noble ones are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the truths of the noble ones that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the meditative concentrations, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the meditative concentrations are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the meditative concentrations are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with [F.216.a] the notion that the meditative concentrations are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the meditative concentrations are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the meditative concentrations that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the immeasurable attitudes, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the immeasurable attitudes are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the immeasurable attitudes are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the immeasurable attitudes are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the immeasurable attitudes are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the immeasurable attitudes that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the formless absorptions, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the formless absorptions are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the formless absorptions are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; [F.216.b] if they do not practice with the notion that the formless absorptions are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the formless absorptions are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the formless absorptions that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the eight liberations, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the eight liberations are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the eight liberations are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the eight liberations are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the eight liberations are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the eight liberations that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the nine serial steps of meditative absorption, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice [F.217.a] with the notion that the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the nine serial steps of meditative absorption that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self [F.217.b] or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the extrasensory powers, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the extrasensory powers are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the extrasensory powers are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the extrasensory powers are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the extrasensory powers are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the extrasensory powers that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the meditative stabilities, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the meditative stabilities are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the meditative stabilities are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the meditative stabilities are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the meditative stabilities are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the meditative stabilities that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or [F.218.a] suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the dhāraṇī gateways, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the dhāraṇī gateways are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the dhāraṇī gateways are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the dhāraṇī gateways are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the dhāraṇī gateways are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the dhāraṇī gateways that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the ten powers of the tathāgatas, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the ten powers of the tathāgatas are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the ten powers of the tathāgatas are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the ten powers of the tathāgatas are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the ten powers of the tathāgatas are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the powers of the tathāgatas [F.218.b] that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the fearlessnesses, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the fearlessnesses are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the fearlessnesses are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the fearlessnesses are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the fearlessnesses are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the fearlessnesses that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with the kinds of exact knowledge, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the kinds of exact knowledge are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the kinds of exact knowledge are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the kinds of exact knowledge are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the kinds of exact knowledge are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because [F.219.a] the kinds of exact knowledge that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with great loving kindness, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that great loving kindness is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that great loving kindness is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that great loving kindness is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that great loving kindness is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because great loving kindness that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with great compassion, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that great compassion is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that great compassion is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that great compassion is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that great compassion is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because great compassion that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant [F.219.b] like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas are ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas are ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas are ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas are ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas that are permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that do not exist.
“If they do not engage with knowledge of all the dharmas, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that knowledge of all the dharmas is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that knowledge of all the dharmas is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that knowledge of all the dharmas is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that knowledge of all the dharmas is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because knowledge of all the dharmas that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant [F.220.a] or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with the knowledge of aspects of the path, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the knowledge of aspects of the path is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the knowledge of aspects of the path is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that the knowledge of aspects of the path is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that the knowledge of aspects of the path is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because the knowledge of aspects of the path that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist.
“If they do not engage with all-aspect omniscience, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that all-aspect omniscience is ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that all-aspect omniscience is ‘happiness’ or ‘suffering,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; if they do not practice with the notion that all-aspect omniscience is ‘a self’ or ‘nonself,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and if they do not practice with the notion that all-aspect omniscience is ‘pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because all-aspect omniscience that is permanent or impermanent, happiness or suffering, a self [F.220.b] or nonself, or pleasant or unpleasant like that does not exist. [B17]
“Moreover, Subhūti, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that physical forms are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘physical forms that are unperfected and perfected are not physical forms,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that feelings are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘feelings that are unperfected and perfected are not feelings,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that perceptions are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘perceptions that are unperfected and perfected are not perceptions,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that formative predispositions are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘formative predispositions that are unperfected and perfected are not formative predispositions,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that consciousness is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask [F.221.a] why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘consciousness that is unperfected and perfected is not consciousness,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“If they do not practice with the notion that the eyes are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the eyes that are unperfected and perfected are not the eyes,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the ears are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the ears that are unperfected and perfected are not the ears,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the nose is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the nose that is unperfected and perfected is not the nose,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the tongue is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the tongue that is unperfected and perfected is not the tongue,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the body is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. [F.221.b] If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the body that is unperfected and perfected is not the body,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the mental faculty is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the mental faculty that is unperfected and perfected is not the mental faculty,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“If they do not practice with the notion that sights are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘sights that are unperfected and perfected are not sights,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that sounds are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘sounds that are unperfected and perfected are not sounds,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that odors are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘odors that are unperfected and perfected are not odors,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that tastes are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘tastes that are unperfected and perfected are not tastes,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that tangibles are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘tangibles that are unperfected and perfected [F.222.a] are not tangibles,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that mental phenomena are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that s ‘mental phenomena that are unperfected and perfected are not mental phenomena,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“If they do not practice with the notion that visual consciousness is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘visual consciousness that is unperfected and perfected is not visual consciousness,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that auditory consciousness is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘auditory consciousness that is unperfected and perfected is not auditory consciousness,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that olfactory consciousness is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘olfactory consciousness that is unperfected and perfected is not olfactory consciousness,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that gustatory consciousness is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that [F.222.b] ‘gustatory consciousness that is unperfected and perfected is not gustatory consciousness,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that tactile consciousness is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘tactile consciousness that is unperfected and perfected is not tactile consciousness,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that mental consciousness is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘mental consciousness that is unperfected and perfected is not mental consciousness,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“If they do not practice with the notion that visually compounded sensory contact is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘visually compounded sensory contact that is unperfected and perfected is not visually compounded sensory contact,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that aurally compounded sensory contact is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘aurally compounded sensory contact that is unperfected and perfected is not aurally compounded sensory contact,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that nasally compounded sensory contact is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ [F.223.a] they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘nasally compounded sensory contact that is unperfected and perfected is not nasally compounded sensory contact,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that lingually compounded sensory contact is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘lingually compounded sensory contact that is unperfected and perfected is not lingually compounded sensory contact,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that corporeally compounded sensory contact is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘corporeally compounded sensory contact that is unperfected and perfected is not corporeally compounded sensory contact,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that mentally compounded sensory contact is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘mentally compounded sensory contact that is unperfected and perfected is not mentally compounded sensory contact,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“If they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact that are unperfected and perfected [F.223.b] are not feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact that are unperfected and perfected are not feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact that are unperfected and perfected are not feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact that are unperfected and perfected are not feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact that are unperfected and perfected [F.224.a] are not feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact that are unperfected and perfected are not feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“If they do not practice with the notion that the earth element is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the earth element that is unperfected and perfected is not the earth element,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the water element is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the water element that is unperfected and perfected is not the water element,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the fire element is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the fire element that is unperfected and perfected is not the fire element,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the wind element is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the wind element that is unperfected and perfected is not the wind element,’ they are practicing [F.224.b] the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the space element is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the space element that is unperfected and perfected is not the space element,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the consciousness element is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the consciousness element that is unperfected and perfected is not the consciousness element,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“If they do not practice with the notion that ignorance is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘ignorance that is unperfected and perfected is not ignorance,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that formative predispositions are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘formative predispositions that are unperfected and perfected are not formative predispositions,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that [F.225.a] consciousness is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘consciousness that is unperfected and perfected is not consciousness,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that name and form are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘name and form that are unperfected and perfected are not name and form,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the six sense fields are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the six sense fields that are unperfected and perfected are not the six sense fields,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that sensory contact is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘sensory contact that is unperfected and perfected is not sensory contact,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that sensation is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘sensation that is unperfected and perfected is not sensation,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. [F.225.b] If they do not practice with the notion that craving is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘craving that is unperfected and perfected is not craving,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that grasping is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘grasping that is unperfected and perfected is not grasping,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the rebirth process is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the rebirth process that is unperfected and perfected is not the rebirth process,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that birth is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘birth that is unperfected and perfected is not birth,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that aging and death are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘aging and death that are unperfected and perfected are not aging and death,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“If they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of generosity is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing [F.226.a] the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of generosity that is unperfected and perfected is not the perfection of generosity,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of ethical discipline is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of ethical discipline that is unperfected and perfected is not the perfection of ethical discipline,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of tolerance is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of tolerance that is unperfected and perfected is not the perfection of tolerance,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of perseverance is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of perseverance that is unperfected and perfected is not the perfection of perseverance,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of meditative concentration is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of meditative concentration that is unperfected and perfected [F.226.b] is not the perfection of meditative concentration,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the perfection of wisdom is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of wisdom that is unperfected and perfected is not the perfection of wisdom,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of internal phenomena is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of internal phenomena that is unperfected and perfected is not the emptiness of internal phenomena,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of external phenomena is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of external phenomena that is unperfected and perfected is not the emptiness of external phenomena,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of external and internal phenomena that is unperfected and perfected is not the emptiness of external and internal phenomena,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of emptiness is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that [F.227.a] ‘the emptiness of emptiness that is unperfected and perfected is not the emptiness of emptiness,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of great extent is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of great extent that is unperfected and perfected is not the emptiness of great extent,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of ultimate reality is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of ultimate reality that is unperfected and perfected is not the emptiness of ultimate reality,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of conditioned phenomena that is unperfected and perfected is not the emptiness of conditioned phenomena,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena that is unperfected and perfected is not the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of the unlimited is ‘unperfected [F.227.b] and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of the unlimited that is unperfected and perfected is not the emptiness of the unlimited,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end that is unperfected and perfected is not the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of nonexclusion is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of nonexclusion that is unperfected and perfected is not the emptiness of nonexclusion,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of inherent nature is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of inherent nature that is unperfected and perfected is not the emptiness of inherent nature,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of all phenomena is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of all phenomena that is unperfected [F.228.a] and perfected is not the emptiness of all phenomena,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics that is unperfected and perfected is not the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended that is unperfected and perfected is not the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of nonentities is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of nonentities that is unperfected and perfected is not the emptiness of nonentities,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of essential nature is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of essential nature that is unperfected and perfected is not the emptiness of essential nature,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is ‘unperfected and [F.228.b] perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities that is unperfected and perfected is not the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“If they do not practice with the notion that the applications of mindfulness are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the applications of mindfulness that are unperfected and perfected are not the applications of mindfulness,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the correct exertions are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the correct exertions that are unperfected and perfected are not the correct exertions,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the supports for miraculous ability are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the supports for miraculous ability that are unperfected and perfected are not the supports for miraculous ability,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the faculties are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the faculties that are unperfected and perfected [F.229.a] are not the faculties,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the powers are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the powers that are unperfected and perfected are not the powers,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the branches of enlightenment are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the branches of enlightenment that are unperfected and perfected are not the branches of enlightenment,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the noble eightfold path is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the noble eightfold path that is unperfected and perfected is not the noble eightfold path,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“If they do not practice with the notion that the truths of the noble ones are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the truths of the noble ones that are unperfected and perfected are not the truths of the noble ones,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that [F.229.b] the meditative concentrations are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the meditative concentrations that are unperfected and perfected are not the meditative concentrations,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the immeasurable attitudes are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the immeasurable attitudes that are unperfected and perfected are not the immeasurable attitudes,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the formless absorptions are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the formless absorptions that are unperfected and perfected are not the formless absorptions,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the eight liberations are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the eight liberations that are unperfected and perfected are not the eight liberations,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, [F.230.a] it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the nine serial steps of meditative absorption that are unperfected and perfected are not the nine serial steps of meditative absorption,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“If they do not practice with the notion that the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation that are unperfected and perfected are not the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the extrasensory powers are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the extrasensory powers that are unperfected and perfected are not the extrasensory powers,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the meditative stabilities are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the meditative stabilities that are unperfected and perfected are not the meditative stabilities,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the dhāraṇī gateways are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, [F.230.b] it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the dhāraṇī gateways that are unperfected and perfected are not the dhāraṇī gateways,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“If they do not practice with the notion that the ten powers of the tathāgatas are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the ten powers of the tathāgatas that are unperfected and perfected are not the ten powers of the tathāgatas,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the four fearlessnesses are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the four fearlessnesses that are unperfected and perfected are not the four fearlessnesses,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the four kinds of exact knowledge are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the four kinds of exact knowledge that are unperfected and perfected are not the four kinds of exact knowledge,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that great loving kindness is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. [F.231.a] If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘great loving kindness that is unperfected and perfected is not great loving kindness,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that great compassion is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘great compassion that is unperfected and perfected is not great compassion,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas are ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas that are unperfected and perfected are not the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“If they do not practice with the notion that knowledge of all the dharmas is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘knowledge of all the dharmas that is unperfected and perfected is not knowledge of all the dharmas,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that the knowledge of aspects of the path is ‘unperfected and perfected’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion that ‘the knowledge of aspects of the path that is unperfected and perfected is not the knowledge of aspects of the path,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If they do not practice with the notion that all-aspect omniscience is ‘unperfected and perfected,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. If you ask why, it is because, if indeed they do not practice with the notion [F.231.b] that ‘all-aspect omniscience that is unperfected and perfected is not all-aspect omniscience,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.”
Subhūti said, “Blessed Lord, how wonderful it is that the tathāgata, arhat, perfectly complete Buddha has excellently revealed attachment and nonattachment in this manner for the sons or daughters of good families who follow the vehicle of the bodhisattvas.”
“So it is, Subhūti, so it is, Subhūti!” replied the Blessed One. “The tathāgata, arhat, perfectly complete Buddha has excellently revealed attachment and nonattachment for the sons or daughters of good families who follow the vehicle of the bodhisattvas.
“Moreover, Subhūti, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘physical forms are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘feelings are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘perceptions are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘formative predispositions are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘consciousness is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“When they practice the perfection of wisdom, [F.232.a] if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the eyes are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the ears are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the nose is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the tongue is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the body is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the mental faculty is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“When they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘sights are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘sounds are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘odors are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘tastes are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘tangibles are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing [F.232.b] the perfection of wisdom; and when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘mental phenomena are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“When they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘visual consciousness is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘auditory consciousness is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘olfactory consciousness is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘gustatory consciousness is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘tactile consciousness is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘mental consciousness is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“When they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘visually compounded sensory contact is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘aurally compounded sensory contact is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘nasally compounded sensory contact is attached [F.233.a] or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘lingually compounded sensory contact is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘corporeally compounded sensory contact is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘mentally compounded sensory contact is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“When they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact [F.233.b] are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“When they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the earth element is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the water element is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the fire element is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the wind element is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the space element is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the consciousness element is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“When they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘ignorance is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘formative predispositions are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘consciousness is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘name and form are attached or [F.234.a] unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the six sense fields are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘sensory contact is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘sensation is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘craving is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘grasping is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the rebirth process is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘birth is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘aging and death are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“When they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of generosity is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of ethical discipline is attached [F.234.b] or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of tolerance is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of perseverance is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of meditative concentration is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the perfection of wisdom is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“When they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of internal phenomena is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of external phenomena is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of emptiness is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of great extent is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of ultimate reality [F.235.a] is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of the unlimited is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of nonexclusion is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of inherent nature is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of all phenomena is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended [F.235.b] is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of nonentities is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of essential nature is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“When they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the applications of mindfulness are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the correct exertions are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the supports for miraculous ability are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the faculties are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the powers are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the branches of enlightenment are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and when they practice the perfection of wisdom, [F.236.a] if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the noble eightfold path is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“When they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the truths of the noble ones are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the meditative concentrations are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the immeasurable attitudes are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the formless absorptions are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the eight liberations are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“When they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the extrasensory powers [F.236.b] are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the meditative stabilities are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the dhāraṇī gateways are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“When they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the ten powers of the tathāgatas are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the four fearlessnesses are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the four kinds of exact knowledge are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘great loving kindness is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘great compassion is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas are attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“When they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘knowledge of all the dharmas is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; [F.237.a] when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘the knowledge of aspects of the path is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom; and when they practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not practice with the notion that ‘all-aspect omniscience is attached or unattached,’ they are practicing the perfection of wisdom.
“Subhūti, when bodhisattva great beings practice in that manner, they do not perceive that ‘physical forms are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘feelings are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘perceptions are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘formative predispositions are attached or unattached,’ and do not perceive that ‘consciousness is attached or unattached.’
“They do not perceive that ‘the eyes are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the ears are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the nose is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the tongue is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the body is attached or unattached,’ and do not perceive that ‘the mental faculty is attached or unattached.’
“They do not perceive that ‘sights are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘sounds are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘odors are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘tastes are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘tangibles are attached or unattached,’ and do not perceive that ‘mental phenomena are attached [F.237.b] or unattached.’
“They do not perceive that ‘visual consciousness is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘auditory consciousness is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘olfactory consciousness is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘gustatory consciousness is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘tactile consciousness is attached or unattached,’ and do not perceive that ‘mental consciousness is attached or unattached.’
“They do not perceive that ‘visually compounded sensory contact is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘aurally compounded sensory contact is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘nasally compounded sensory contact is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘lingually compounded sensory contact is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘corporeally compounded sensory contact is attached or unattached,’ and do not perceive that ‘mentally compounded sensory contact is attached or unattached.’
“They do not perceive that ‘feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are attached [F.238.a] or unattached,’ and do not perceive that ‘feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are attached or unattached.’
“They do not perceive that ‘the earth element is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the water element is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the fire element is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the wind element is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the space element is attached or unattached,’ and do not perceive that ‘the consciousness element is attached or unattached.’
“They do not perceive that ‘ignorance is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘formative predispositions are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘consciousness is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘name and form are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the six sense fields are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘sensory contact is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘sensation is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘craving is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘grasping is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the rebirth process is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘birth is attached or unattached,’ and do not perceive that ‘aging and death are attached or unattached.’
“They do not perceive that ‘the perfection of generosity is attached or unattached,’ [F.238.b] do not perceive that ‘the perfection of ethical discipline is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the perfection of tolerance is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the perfection of perseverance is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the perfection of meditative concentration is attached or unattached,’ and do not perceive that ‘the perfection of wisdom is attached or unattached.’
“They do not perceive that ‘the emptiness of internal phenomena is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the emptiness of external phenomena is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the emptiness of emptiness is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the emptiness of great extent is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the emptiness of ultimate reality is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the emptiness of the unlimited is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the emptiness of nonexclusion is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the emptiness of inherent nature is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the emptiness of all phenomena is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is [F.239.a] attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the emptiness of nonentities is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the emptiness of essential nature is attached or unattached,’ and do not perceive that ‘the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is attached or unattached.’
“They do not perceive that ‘the applications of mindfulness are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the correct exertions are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the supports for miraculous ability are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the faculties are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the powers are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the branches of enlightenment are attached or unattached,’ and do not perceive that ‘the noble eightfold path is attached or unattached.’
“They do not perceive that ‘the truths of the noble ones are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the meditative concentrations are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the immeasurable attitudes are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the formless absorptions are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the eight liberations are attached or unattached,’ and do not perceive that ‘the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are attached or unattached.’
“They do not perceive that ‘the emptiness, [F.239.b] signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the extrasensory powers are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the meditative stabilities are attached or unattached,’ and do not perceive that ‘the dhāraṇī gateways are attached or unattached.’
“They do not perceive that ‘the ten powers of the tathāgatas are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the four fearlessnesses are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the four kinds of exact knowledge are attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘great loving kindness is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘great compassion is attached or unattached,’ and do not perceive that ‘the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas are attached or unattached.’
“They do not perceive that ‘the fruit of having entered the stream is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the fruit of once-returner is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘the fruit of non-returner is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘arhatship is attached or unattached,’ do not perceive that ‘individual enlightenment is attached or unattached,’ and do not perceive that ‘unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment is attached or unattached.’ ”
“Blessed Lord, it is most wonderful that this profound Dharma is neither diminished when it is explained, nor is it diminished when it is not explained. It is neither enhanced when it is explained, nor is it enhanced when it is not explained!”
“It is so, [F.240.a] Subhūti, it is so!” replied the Blessed One. “This profound Dharma is neither diminished when it is explained, nor is it diminished when it is not explained. It is neither enhanced when it is explained, nor is it enhanced when it is not explained. Subhūti, this is just as if the tathāgatas, arhats, perfectly complete buddhas were to speak in praise or speak disparagingly836 of space for the duration of their entire lives. Space is neither enhanced when it spoken of in praise, nor is it be diminished when it is spoken about disparagingly. Subhūti, this is just like illusory persons who are neither enhanced when spoken of in praise, nor diminished when spoken about disparagingly. They do not become attached when spoken of in praise, and do not become annoyed when spoken about disparagingly. Similarly, Subhūti, with that reality of phenomena as it pertains to phenomena, it is such when it is explained, and it is such even when it is not explained.”
“Blessed Lord,” said Subhūti, “when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom and teach the perfection of wisdom and are neither disheartened nor distracted, persevere in this perfection of wisdom, and do not turn back from unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment, they do that which is difficult. If you ask why, Blessed Lord, it is because this cultivation of the perfection of wisdom by bodhisattva great beings is like the cultivation of space. In space, physical forms are not discerned, feelings are not discerned, perceptions are not discerned, formative predispositions are not discerned, [F.240.b] and consciousness is not discerned. In space, the eyes are not discerned, the ears are not discerned, the nose is not discerned, the tongue is not discerned, the body is not discerned, and the mental faculty is not discerned. In space, sights are not discerned, sounds are not discerned, odors are not discerned, tastes are not discerned, tangibles are not discerned, and mental phenomena are not discerned. In space, visual consciousness is not discerned, auditory consciousness is not discerned, olfactory consciousness is not discerned, gustatory consciousness is not discerned, tactile consciousness is not discerned, and mental consciousness is not discerned. In space, visually compounded sensory contact is not discerned, aurally compounded sensory contact is not discerned, nasally compounded sensory contact is not discerned, lingually compounded sensory contact is not discerned, corporeally compounded sensory contact is not discerned, and mentally compounded sensory contact is not discerned. In space, feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are not discerned, feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are not discerned, feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are not discerned, feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are not discerned, feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are not discerned, and feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are not discerned. In space, the earth element is not discerned, the water element is not discerned, the fire element is not discerned, the wind element is not discerned, the space element is not discerned, and the consciousness element is not discerned. In space, ignorance is not discerned, formative predispositions are not discerned, consciousness is not discerned, name and form are not discerned, the six sense fields are not discerned, sensory contact is not discerned, sensation [F.241.a] is not discerned, craving is not discerned, grasping is not discerned, the rebirth process is not discerned, birth is not discerned, and aging and death are not discerned. In space, the perfection of generosity is not discerned, the perfection of ethical discipline is not discerned, the perfection of tolerance is not discerned, the perfection of perseverance is not discerned, the perfection of meditative concentration is not discerned, and the perfection of wisdom is not discerned. In space, the emptiness of internal phenomena is not discerned, the emptiness of external phenomena is not discerned, the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is not discerned, the emptiness of emptiness is not discerned, the emptiness of great extent is not discerned, the emptiness of ultimate reality is not discerned, the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is not discerned, the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is not discerned, the emptiness of the unlimited is not discerned, the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is not discerned, the emptiness of nonexclusion is not discerned, the emptiness of inherent nature is not discerned, the emptiness of all phenomena is not discerned, the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is not discerned, the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is not discerned, the emptiness of nonentities is not discerned, the emptiness of essential nature is not discerned, and the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is not discerned. In space, the applications of mindfulness are not discerned, the correct exertions are not discerned, the supports for miraculous ability are not discerned, the faculties are not discerned, the powers are not discerned, the branches of enlightenment are not discerned, and the noble eightfold path is not discerned. In space, the truths of the noble ones are not discerned, the meditative concentrations are not discerned, the immeasurable attitudes [F.241.b] are not discerned, the formless absorptions are not discerned, the eight liberations are not discerned, and the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are not discerned. In space, the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are not discerned, the extrasensory powers are not discerned, the meditative stabilities are not discerned, and the dhāraṇī gateways are not discerned. In space, the ten powers of the tathāgatas are not discerned, the four fearlessnesses are not discerned, the four kinds of exact knowledge are not discerned, great loving kindness is not discerned, great compassion is not discerned, and the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas are not discerned. In space, the fruit of having entered the stream is not discerned, the fruit of once-returner is not discerned, the fruit of non-returner is not discerned, arhatship is not discerned, individual enlightenment is not discerned, and unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment is not discerned. [B18]
“Blessed Lord, those bodhisattva great beings who have donned this armor are worthy of homage. Blessed Lord, those who have donned this armor believe resolutely in striving, believe resolutely in struggling, and believe resolutely in making an effort for the sake of space. Blessed Lord, those who don this armor for the sake of beings want to bring space to maturity and want to liberate it.
“Blessed Lord, those bodhisattva great beings who don this armor for the sake of phenomena [F.242.a] that are like space have donned the mighty armor. Blessed Lord, those bodhisattva great beings who have donned this armor for the sake of beings want to buttress space with the sky.837 Blessed Lord, those bodhisattva great beings who have set out for unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment for the sake of beings have acquired the mighty perseverance. Blessed Lord, those bodhisattva great beings who have set out for unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment for the welfare of beings have donned the mighty armor. Blessed Lord, those bodhisattva great beings who want to fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment for the sake of phenomena that are like space, those heroes, have donned the mighty armor that is inconceivable and unequaled.
“If you ask why, Blessed Lord, it is because, if this great billionfold world system were completely filled with many tathāgatas, like a thicket of naḍa reeds, or a thicket of rushes,838 or a grove of sugarcane, or a thicket of bamboo, or a paddy field of rice, or a field of sesame, and were those tathāgatas for an eon or for even more than an eon to explain the Dharma, and were each of those tathāgatas to bring immeasurable, countless beings to final nirvāṇa, still, a reduction in or filling of the world of beings would not be discerned. If you ask why, it is because beings are nonexistent and because beings are void. Similarly, if the fields [F.242.b] in each of the world systems of the ten directions, numerous as the grains of sand of the river Gaṅgā, were completely filled with many tathāgatas like a thicket of naḍa reeds, or a thicket of rushes, or a grove of sugarcane, or a thicket of bamboo, or a paddy field of rice, or a field of sesame, and were those tathāgatas for an eon or for even more than an eon to explain the Dharma, and were each of those tathāgatas to bring immeasurable, countless beings to final nirvāṇa, still, a reduction in or filling of the world of beings would not be discerned. If you ask why, it is because beings are nonexistent and because beings are void. Blessed Lord, through this round of teaching I say that those who want to fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment for the sake of beings want to bring space to maturity and want to liberate it.”
Then a certain monk thought, “I pay homage to the blessed lady, the perfection of wisdom, in whom, although no attribute at all arises or ceases, the aggregate of ethical discipline still exists, the aggregate of meditative stability still exists, the aggregate of wisdom still exists, the aggregate of liberation still exists, and the aggregate of knowledge and seeing of liberation still exists; the fruit of having entering the stream still exists, the fruit of once-returner still exists, the fruit of non-returner still exists, arhatship still exists, individual enlightenment still exists, and unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment still exists; those who have entered the stream still exist, once-returners still exist, non-returners still exist, arhats still exist, pratyekabuddhas [F.243.a] still exist, and the tathāgatas, arhats, perfectly complete buddhas still exist; and the precious jewel of the Buddha still exists, the precious jewel of the Dharma still exists, and the precious jewel of the Saṅgha still exists, and the turnings of the wheel of the Dharma still exist.”
Then, Śakra, mighty king of the gods, asked the venerable Subhūti, “Venerable monk Subhūti, if a bodhisattva great being is one of those who are persevering at this profound perfection of wisdom, at what are they persevering?”
“Kauśika,” replied Subhūti, “those who think that they should train in this perfection of wisdom persevere at empty space.”
Śakra, mighty king of the gods, then said to the Blessed One, “Blessed Lord, I request that you tell me what sort of guarding, protecting, and defending of those sons or daughters of good families who take up, uphold, recite, master, and focus their attention correctly on this profound perfection of wisdom I should do.”
Then the venerable Subhūti asked Śakra, mighty king of the gods, “Kauśika, do you observe any sort of attribute that should be guarded, protected, and defended?”
“Venerable monk Subhūti, I do not observe any sort of attribute that should be guarded, protected, and defended,” he replied.
“Kauśika,” Subhūti continued, “if sons or daughters of good families dwell [F.243.b] in this perfection of wisdom, as it has been taught, that itself will be their guardian, protection, and defense. If they are separated from this perfection of wisdom, as it has been taught, humans or nonhumans looking for an opportunity to inflict harm will find an opportunity to do so. You should know that those sons or daughters of good families who do not dwell in this perfection of wisdom, as it has been taught, are separated from the perfection of wisdom.
“Kauśika, those who think they should guard, protect, and defend bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom think they should guard, protect, and defend space. They will not succeed as they intend and will tire themselves out.
“Kauśika, do you think that you can guard, protect, and defend a magical display, a mirage, a dream, an echo, an optical aberration, or a phantom?”
“Similarly, Kauśika,” said Subhūti, “those who think they should guard, protect, and defend bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom will not succeed as they intend and will tire themselves out.
“Kauśika, do you think you can guard, protect, and defend the tathāgatas or the phantom emanations of the tathāgatas?”
“Similarly, Kauśika,” said Subhūti, “those who think they should guard, protect, and defend [F.244.a] bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom will not succeed as they intend and will tire themselves out.
“Kauśika, do you think you can guard, protect, and defend the realm of phenomena, the very limit of reality, the real nature, or the realm of the inconceivable?”
“Similarly, Kauśika,” said Subhūti, “those who think they should guard, protect, and defend bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom will not succeed as they intend and will tire themselves out.”
Then Śakra, mighty king of the gods, asked the venerable Subhūti, “Venerable monk Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom comprehend phenomena that are like a dream, phenomena that are like an illusion, a mirage, an echo, an optical aberration, a castle in the sky, and a magical display, and yet, comprehending in that manner, to what extent do bodhisattva great beings not give rise to the conceit of a dream, not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and not give rise to conceit about a dream; do they not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and not give rise to conceit about an illusion; do they not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and not give rise to conceit about a mirage; do they not give rise to the conceit of an echo, not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, not give rise to the conceit that [F.244.b] an echo is ‘mine,’ and not give rise to conceit about an echo; do they not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration; do they not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky; and do they not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and not give rise to conceit about a magical display?”
“Kauśika,” replied Subhūti, “when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of physical forms, do not give rise to conceit on account of physical forms, do not give rise to the conceit that physical forms are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about physical forms, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise [F.245.a] to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of feelings, do not give rise to conceit on account of feelings, do not give rise to the conceit that feelings are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about feelings, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle [F.245.b] in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of perceptions, do not give rise to conceit on account of perceptions, do not give rise to the conceit that perceptions are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about perceptions, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva [F.246.a] great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit that they are formative predispositions, do not give rise to conceit on account of formative predispositions, do not give rise to the conceit that formative predispositions are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about formative predispositions, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of consciousness, do not give rise to conceit on account of consciousness, do not give rise to the conceit [F.246.b] that consciousness is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about consciousness, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit that they are the eyes, do not give rise to conceit on account of the eyes, do not give rise to the conceit that the eyes are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the eyes, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ [F.247.a] and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the ears, do not give rise to conceit on account of the ears, do not give rise to the conceit that the ears are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the ears, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ [F.247.b] and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“When bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the nose, do not give rise to conceit on account of the nose, do not give rise to the conceit that the nose is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the nose, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not [F.248.a] give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the tongue, do not give rise to conceit on account of the tongue, do not give rise to the conceit that the tongue is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the tongue, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo [F.248.b] is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the body, do not give rise to conceit on account of the body, do not give rise to the conceit that the body is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the body, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ [F.249.a] and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the mental faculty, do not give rise to conceit on account of the mental faculty, do not give rise to the conceit that the mental faculty is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the mental faculty, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky [F.249.b] is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of sights, do not give rise to conceit on account of sights, do not give rise to the conceit to conceit that sights are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about sights, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ [F.250.a] and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of sounds, do not give rise to conceit on account of sounds, do not give rise to the conceit that sounds are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about sounds, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of odors, do not [F.250.b] give rise to conceit on account of odors, do not give rise to the conceit that odors are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about odors, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of tastes, do not give rise to conceit on account of tastes, do not give rise to the conceit that tastes are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about tastes, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ [F.251.a] and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of tangibles, do not give rise to conceit on account of tangibles, do not give rise to the conceit that tangibles are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about tangibles, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion [F.251.b] is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of mental phenomena, do not give rise to conceit on account of mental phenomena, do not give rise to the conceit that mental phenomena are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about mental phenomena, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit [F.252.a] about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of visual consciousness, do not give rise to conceit on account of visual consciousness, do not give rise to the conceit that visual consciousness is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about visual consciousness, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not [F.252.b] give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of auditory consciousness, do not give rise to conceit on account of auditory consciousness, do not give rise to the conceit that auditory consciousness is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about auditory consciousness, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit [F.253.a] on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of olfactory consciousness, do not give rise to conceit on account of olfactory consciousness, do not give rise to the conceit that olfactory consciousness is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about olfactory consciousness, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. [F.253.b] They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of gustatory consciousness, do not give rise to conceit on account of gustatory consciousness, do not give rise to the conceit that gustatory consciousness is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about gustatory consciousness, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ [F.254.a] and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of tactile consciousness, do not give rise to conceit on account of tactile consciousness, do not give rise to the conceit that tactile consciousness is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about tactile consciousness, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise [F.254.b] to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of mental consciousness, do not give rise to conceit on account of mental consciousness, do not give rise to the conceit that mental consciousness is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about mental consciousness, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, [F.255.a] if they do not give rise to the conceit of visually compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to conceit on account of visually compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to the conceit that visually compounded sensory contact is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about visually compounded sensory contact, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of aurally compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to conceit on account of aurally compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to the conceit that aurally compounded sensory contact [F.255.b] is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about aurally compounded sensory contact, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of nasally compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to conceit on account of nasally compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to the conceit that nasally compounded sensory contact is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about nasally compounded sensory contact, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise [F.256.a] to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of lingually compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to conceit on account of lingually compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to the conceit that lingually compounded sensory contact is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about lingually compounded sensory contact, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit [F.256.b] that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of corporeally compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to conceit on account of corporeally compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to the conceit that corporeally compounded sensory contact is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about corporeally compounded sensory contact, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ [F.257.a] and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of mentally compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to conceit on account of mentally compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to the conceit that mentally compounded sensory contact is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about mentally compounded sensory contact, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise [F.257.b] to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to conceit on account of feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to the conceit that feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in [F.258.a] the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to conceit on account of feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to the conceit that feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit [F.258.b] on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to conceit on account of feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to the conceit that feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit [F.259.a] about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to conceit on account of feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to the conceit that feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not [F.259.b] give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to conceit on account of feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to the conceit that feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise [F.260.a] to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to conceit on account of feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact, do not give rise to the conceit that feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings [F.260.b] practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the earth element, do not give rise to conceit on account of the earth element, do not give rise to the conceit that the earth element is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the earth element, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the water element, do not give rise to conceit on account of the water element, do not give rise to the conceit that the water element [F.261.a] is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the water element, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the fire element, do not give rise to conceit on account of the fire element, do not give rise to the conceit that the fire element is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the fire element, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ [F.261.b] and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the wind element, do not give rise to conceit on account of the wind element, do not give rise to the conceit that the wind element is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the wind element, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise [F.262.a] to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the space element, do not give rise to conceit on account of the space element, do not give rise to the conceit that the space element is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the space element, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage [F.262.b] is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the consciousness element, do not give rise to conceit on account of the consciousness element, do not give rise to the conceit that the consciousness element is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the consciousness element, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, [F.263.a] do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of ignorance, do not give rise to conceit on account of ignorance, do not give rise to the conceit that ignorance is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about ignorance, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ [F.263.b] and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit that they are formative predispositions, do not give rise to conceit on account of formative predispositions, do not give rise to the conceit to conceit that formative predispositions are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about formative predispositions, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not [F.264.a] give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of consciousness, do not give rise to conceit on account of consciousness, do not give rise to the conceit that consciousness is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about consciousness, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display [F.264.b] is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of name and form, do not give rise to conceit on account of name and form, do not give rise to the conceit that name and form are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about name and form, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of [F.265.a] the six sense fields, do not give rise to conceit on account of the six sense fields, do not give rise to the conceit that the six sense fields are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the six sense fields, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of sensory contact, do not give rise to conceit on account of sensory contact, do not give rise to the conceit that sensory contact is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about sensory contact, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, [F.265.b] do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of sensation, do not give rise to conceit on account of sensation, do not give rise to the conceit that sensation is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about sensation, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, [F.266.a] do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of craving, do not give rise to conceit on account of craving, do not give rise to the conceit that craving is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about craving, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage [F.266.b] is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of grasping, do not give rise to conceit on account of grasping, do not give rise to the conceit that grasping is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about grasping, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not [F.267.a] give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the rebirth process, do not give rise to conceit on account of the rebirth process, do not give rise to the conceit that the rebirth process is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the rebirth process, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. [F.267.b] They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of birth, do not give rise to conceit on account of birth, do not give rise to the conceit that birth is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about birth, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. [F.268.a] And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of aging and death, do not give rise to conceit on account of aging and death, do not give rise to the conceit that aging and death are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about aging and death, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ [F.268.b] and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display. [B19]
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the perfection of generosity, do not give rise to conceit on account of the perfection of generosity, do not give rise to the conceit that the perfection of generosity is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the perfection of generosity, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ [F.269.a] and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the perfection of ethical discipline, do not give rise to conceit on account of the perfection of ethical discipline, do not give rise to the conceit that the perfection of ethical discipline is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the perfection of ethical discipline, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when [F.269.b] bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the perfection of tolerance, do not give rise to conceit on account of the perfection of tolerance, do not give rise to the conceit that the perfection of tolerance is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the perfection of tolerance, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not [F.270.a] give rise to the conceit of the perfection of perseverance, do not give rise to conceit on account of the perfection of perseverance, do not give rise to the conceit that the perfection of perseverance is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the perfection of perseverance, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the perfection of meditative concentration, do not give rise to conceit on account of [F.270.b] the perfection of meditative concentration, do not give rise to the conceit that the perfection of meditative concentration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the perfection of meditative concentration, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the perfection of wisdom, do not give rise to conceit on account of the perfection of wisdom, do not give rise to the conceit that the perfection of wisdom is ‘mine,’ [F.271.a] and do not give rise to conceit about the perfection of wisdom, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the emptiness of internal phenomena, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness of internal phenomena, do not give rise [F.271.b] to the conceit that the emptiness of internal phenomena is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the emptiness of internal phenomena, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the emptiness of external phenomena, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness of external phenomena, do not give rise to the conceit that the emptiness of external phenomena is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the emptiness of external phenomena, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is [F.272.a] ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the emptiness of external and internal phenomena, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness of external and internal phenomena, do not give rise to the conceit that the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the emptiness of external and internal phenomena, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage [F.272.b] is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the emptiness of emptiness, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness of emptiness, do not give rise to the conceit that the emptiness of emptiness is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the emptiness of emptiness, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that [F.273.a] an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the emptiness of great extent, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness of great extent, do not give rise to the conceit that the emptiness of great extent is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the emptiness of great extent, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of [F.273.b] an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the emptiness of ultimate reality, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness of ultimate reality, do not give rise to the conceit that the emptiness of ultimate reality is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the emptiness of ultimate reality, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit [F.274.a] on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the emptiness of conditioned phenomena, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness of conditioned phenomena, do not give rise to the conceit that the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the emptiness of conditioned phenomena, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not [F.274.b] give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena, do not give rise to the conceit that the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when [F.275.a] bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the emptiness of the unlimited, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness of the unlimited, do not give rise to the conceit that the emptiness of the unlimited is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the emptiness of the unlimited, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not [F.275.b] give rise to the conceit of the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end, do not give rise to the conceit that the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the emptiness of nonexclusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness of nonexclusion, do not give rise to the conceit that the emptiness of nonexclusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit [F.276.a] about the emptiness of nonexclusion, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the emptiness of inherent nature, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness of inherent nature, do not give rise to the conceit that the emptiness of inherent nature is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the emptiness of inherent nature, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is [F.276.b] ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the emptiness of all phenomena, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness of all phenomena, do not give rise to the conceit that the emptiness of all phenomena is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the emptiness of all phenomena, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. [F.277.a] They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics, do not give rise to the conceit that the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that [F.277.b] a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended, do not give rise to the conceit that the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, [F.278.a] do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the emptiness of nonentities, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness of nonentities, do not give rise to the conceit that the emptiness of nonentities is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the emptiness of nonentities, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of [F.278.b] an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the emptiness of essential nature, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness of essential nature, do not give rise to the conceit that the emptiness of essential nature is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the emptiness of essential nature, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of [F.279.a] a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities, do not give rise to the conceit that the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle [F.279.b] in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the applications of mindfulness, do not give rise to conceit on account of the applications of mindfulness, do not give rise to the conceit that the applications of mindfulness are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the applications of mindfulness, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not [F.280.a] give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the correct exertions, do not give rise to conceit on account of the correct exertions, do not give rise to the conceit that the correct exertions are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the correct exertions, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when [F.280.b] bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the supports for miraculous ability, do not give rise to conceit on account of the supports for miraculous ability, do not give rise to the conceit that the supports for miraculous ability are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the supports for miraculous ability, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the faculties, do not give rise to conceit [F.281.a] on account of the faculties, do not give rise to the conceit that the faculties are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the faculties, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the powers, do not give rise to conceit on account of the powers, do not give rise to the conceit that the powers are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the powers, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not [F.281.b] give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the branches of enlightenment, do not give rise to conceit on account of the branches of enlightenment, do not give rise to the conceit that the branches of enlightenment are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the branches of enlightenment, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account [F.282.a] of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the noble eightfold path, do not give rise to conceit on account of the noble eightfold path, do not give rise to the conceit that the noble eightfold path is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the noble eightfold path, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about [F.282.b] an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the truths of the noble ones, do not give rise to conceit on account of the truths of the noble ones, do not give rise to the conceit that the truths of the noble ones are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the truths of the noble ones, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. [F.283.a] They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the meditative concentrations, do not give rise to conceit on account of the meditative concentrations, do not give rise to the conceit that the meditative concentrations are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the meditative concentrations, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not [F.283.b] give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the immeasurable attitudes, do not give rise to conceit on account of the immeasurable attitudes, do not give rise to the conceit that the immeasurable attitudes are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the immeasurable attitudes, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration [F.284.a] is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the formless absorptions, do not give rise to conceit on account of the formless absorptions, do not give rise to the conceit that the formless absorptions are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the formless absorptions, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration [F.284.b] is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the eight liberations, do not give rise to conceit on account of the eight liberations, do not give rise to the conceit that the eight liberations are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the eight liberations, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of [F.285.a] a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the nine serial steps of meditative absorption, do not give rise to conceit on account of the nine serial steps of meditative absorption, do not give rise to the conceit that the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the nine serial steps of meditative absorption, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, [F.285.b] do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation, do not give rise to conceit on account of the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation, do not give rise to the conceit that the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ [F.286.a] and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the extrasensory powers, do not give rise to conceit on account of the extrasensory powers, do not give rise to the conceit that the extrasensory powers are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the extrasensory powers, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, [F.286.b] do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the meditative stabilities, do not give rise to conceit on account of the meditative stabilities, do not give rise to the conceit that the meditative stabilities are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the meditative stabilities, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. [F.287.a] And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the dhāraṇī gateways, do not give rise to conceit on account of the dhāraṇī gateways, do not give rise to the conceit that the dhāraṇī gateways are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the dhāraṇī gateways, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that [F.287.b] a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the ten powers of the tathāgatas, do not give rise to conceit on account of the ten powers of the tathāgatas, do not give rise to the conceit that the ten powers of the tathāgatas are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the ten powers of the tathāgatas, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when [F.288.a] bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the four fearlessnesses, do not give rise to conceit on account of the four fearlessnesses, do not give rise to the conceit that the four fearlessnesses are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the four fearlessnesses, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, [F.288.b] if they do not give rise to the conceit of the four kinds of exact knowledge, do not give rise to conceit on account of the four kinds of exact knowledge, do not give rise to the conceit that the four kinds of exact knowledge are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the four kinds of exact knowledge, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of great loving kindness, do not give rise to conceit on account of great loving kindness, do not give rise to the conceit [F.289.a] that great loving kindness is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about great loving kindness, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of great compassion, do not give rise to conceit on account of great compassion, do not give rise to the conceit that great compassion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about great compassion, they do not give rise [F.289.b] to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas, do not give rise to conceit on account of the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas, do not give rise to the conceit that the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas are ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of [F.290.a] a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of knowledge of all the dharmas, do not give rise to conceit on account of knowledge of all the dharmas, do not give rise to the conceit that knowledge of all the dharmas is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about knowledge of all the dharmas, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They [F.290.b] do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of the knowledge of aspects of the path, do not give rise to conceit on account of the knowledge of aspects of the path, do not give rise to the conceit that the knowledge of aspects of the path is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about the knowledge of aspects of the path, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that [F.291.a] an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.
“Kauśika, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, if they do not give rise to the conceit of all-aspect omniscience, do not give rise to conceit on account of all-aspect omniscience, do not give rise to the conceit that all-aspect omniscience is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about all-aspect omniscience, they do not give rise to the conceit of a dream, do not give rise to conceit on account of a dream, do not give rise to the conceit that a dream is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a dream. They do not give rise to the conceit of an illusion, do not give rise to conceit on account of an illusion, do not give rise to the conceit that an illusion is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an illusion. They do not [F.291.b] give rise to the conceit of a mirage, do not give rise to conceit on account of a mirage, do not give rise to the conceit that a mirage is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a mirage. They do not give rise to the conceit of an echo, do not give rise to conceit on account of an echo, do not give rise to the conceit that an echo is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an echo. They do not give rise to the conceit of an optical aberration, do not give rise to conceit on account of an optical aberration, do not give rise to the conceit that an optical aberration is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about an optical aberration. They do not give rise to the conceit of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to conceit on account of a castle in the sky, do not give rise to the conceit that a castle in the sky is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a castle in the sky. And they do not give rise to the conceit of a magical display, do not give rise to conceit on account of a magical display, do not give rise to the conceit that a magical display is ‘mine,’ and do not give rise to conceit about a magical display.” [B20]
Then, through the power of the Buddha, in this billionfold world system, the gods of the Cāturmahārājika realm; the gods of the Trayastriṃśa realm, the gods of the Yāma realm, the gods of the Tuṣita realm, the gods of the Nirmāṇarati realm, and the gods of the Paranirmitavaśavartin realm; the gods of the Brahmakāyika realm, the gods of the Brahmapurohita realm, the gods of the Brahmapārṣadya realm, and the gods of the Mahābrahmā realm; the gods of the Ābha realm, the gods of the Parīttābha realm, the gods of the Apramāṇābha realm, and the gods of the Ābhāsvara realm; the gods of the Śubha realm, the gods of the Parīttaśubha realm, the gods of the Apramāṇaśubha realm, and the gods of the Śubhakṛtsna realm; the gods of the Vṛha realm, the gods of the Parīttavṛha realm, the gods of the Apramāṇavṛha realm, and the gods of the Vṛhatphala realm; and the gods of the Avṛha realm, [F.292.a] the gods of the Atapa realm, the gods of the Sudṛśa realm, the gods of the Sudarśana realm, and the gods of the Akaniṣṭha realm, all of them, as many as there were, showered divine sandalwood powders down upon the Blessed One and approached the place where the Blessed One was seated. Bowing their heads at the feet of the Blessed One, they took their places to one side.
Then, through the power of the Buddha, the Four Great Kings, Śakra the mighty lord of the gods, Brahmā the lord of the world system of Patient Endurance, the gods of the Ābhāsvara realm, the gods of the Śubhakṛtsna realm, the gods of the Vṛhatphala realm, and the gods in the realms of the Śuddhāvāsa realms beheld in their minds the thousand buddhas of the eastern direction teaching the Dharma through these very syllables, endowed with these very major marks, with monks all named Subhūti requesting this very profound perfection of wisdom, this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom, and then Śakra, mighty king of the gods, requesting and asking questions about this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom.
They beheld in their minds the thousand buddhas of the southern direction teaching the Dharma through these very syllables, endowed with these very major marks, with monks all named Subhūti requesting this very profound perfection of wisdom, this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom, and then Śakra, mighty king of the gods, requesting and asking questions about this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom. They beheld in their minds the thousand buddhas of the western direction teaching the Dharma through these very syllables, endowed with these very major marks, with monks all named Subhūti requesting this very profound perfection of wisdom, [F.292.b] this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom, and then Śakra, mighty king of the gods, requesting and asking questions about this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom. They beheld in their minds the thousand buddhas of the northern direction teaching the Dharma through these very syllables, endowed with these very major marks, with monks all named Subhūti requesting this very profound perfection of wisdom, this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom, and then Śakra, mighty king of the gods, requesting and asking questions about this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom. They beheld in their minds the thousand buddhas of the intermediate northeastern direction teaching the Dharma through these very syllables, endowed with these very major marks, with monks all named Subhūti requesting this very profound perfection of wisdom, this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom, and then Śakra, mighty king of the gods, requesting and asking questions about this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom. They beheld in their minds the thousand buddhas of the intermediate southeastern direction teaching the Dharma through these very syllables, endowed with these very major marks, with monks all named Subhūti requesting this very profound perfection of wisdom, this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom, and then Śakra, mighty king of the gods, requesting and asking questions about this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom. They beheld in their minds the thousand buddhas of the intermediate southwestern direction teaching the Dharma through these very syllables, endowed with these very major marks, with monks all named Subhūti requesting [F.293.a] this very profound perfection of wisdom, this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom, and then Śakra, mighty king of the gods, requesting and asking questions about this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom. They beheld in their minds the thousand buddhas of the intermediate northwestern direction teaching the Dharma through these very syllables, endowed with these very major marks, with monks all named Subhūti requesting this very profound perfection of wisdom, this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom, and then Śakra, mighty king of the gods, requesting and asking questions about this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom. They beheld in their minds the thousand buddhas of the direction below teaching the Dharma through these very syllables, endowed with these very major marks, with monks all named Subhūti requesting this very profound perfection of wisdom, this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom, and then Śakra, mighty king of the gods, requesting and asking questions about this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom. And they beheld in their minds the thousand buddhas of the direction above teaching the Dharma through these very syllables, endowed with these very major marks, with monks all named Subhūti requesting this very profound perfection of wisdom, this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom, and then Śakra, mighty king of the gods, requesting and asking questions about this very chapter of the perfection of wisdom.
Then the Blessed One said to the venerable Subhūti, “Subhūti, once the bodhisattva great being Maitreya has attained consummate [F.293.b] buddhahood in unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment, he will teach and explain this very perfection of wisdom in this very place on the earth as well. Once all the tathāgatas, arhats, perfectly complete buddhas in this Auspicious Eon have fully awakened to unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment, they too will teach and explain this very perfection of wisdom in this very place.”
Subhūti asked, “Blessed Lord, through what aspects, through what modes, and through what signs will the bodhisattva great being Maitreya teach and explain this very perfection of wisdom, having fully awakened to unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment?”
The Blessed One replied to the venerable Subhūti, “Here, Subhūti, the bodhisattva great being Maitreya, having fully awakened to unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment, will not teach the Dharma that ‘physical forms are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘physical forms are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘physical forms are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘physical forms are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘physical forms are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘physical forms are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘physical forms are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘physical forms are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that [F.294.a] ‘physical forms are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘perceptions are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘perceptions are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘perceptions are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘perceptions are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘perceptions are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘perceptions are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘perceptions are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘perceptions are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘perceptions are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘formative predispositions are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘formative predispositions are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘formative predispositions are a self’ or [F.294.b] ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘formative predispositions are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘formative predispositions are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘formative predispositions are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘formative predispositions are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘formative predispositions are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘formative predispositions are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘consciousness is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘consciousness is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘consciousness is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘consciousness is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘consciousness is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘consciousness is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘consciousness is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘consciousness is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘consciousness is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the eyes are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the eyes are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the eyes are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the eyes are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the eyes are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the eyes are fettered,’ or [F.295.a] ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the eyes are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the eyes are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the eyes are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the ears are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the ears are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the ears are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the ears are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the ears are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the ears are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the ears are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the ears are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the ears are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the nose is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the nose is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the nose is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the nose is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the nose is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the nose is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the nose is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the nose is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the nose is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the tongue is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the tongue is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma [F.295.b] that ‘the tongue is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the tongue is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the tongue is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the tongue is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the tongue is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the tongue is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the tongue is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the body is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the body is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the body is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the body is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the body is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the body is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the body is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the body is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the body is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the mental faculty is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the mental faculty is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the mental faculty is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the mental faculty is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the mental faculty is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the mental faculty is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the mental faculty is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the mental faculty is [F.296.a] future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the mental faculty is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘sights are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sights are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sights are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sights are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sights are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sights are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sights are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sights are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘sights are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘sounds are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sounds are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sounds are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sounds are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sounds are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sounds are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sounds are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sounds are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘sounds are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘odors are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘odors are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘odors are a self’ or ‘nonself’; [F.296.b] will not teach the Dharma that ‘odors are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘odors are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘odors are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘odors are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘odors are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘odors are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘tastes are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tastes are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tastes are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tastes are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tastes are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tastes are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tastes are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tastes are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘tastes are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘tangibles are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tangibles are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tangibles are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tangibles are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tangibles are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tangibles are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tangibles are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tangibles are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘tangibles are present.’
“He will not teach [F.297.a] the Dharma that ‘mental phenomena are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mental phenomena are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mental phenomena are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mental phenomena are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mental phenomena are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mental phenomena are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mental phenomena are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mental phenomena are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘mental phenomena are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘visual consciousness is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘visual consciousness is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘visual consciousness is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘visual consciousness is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘visual consciousness is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘visual consciousness is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘visual consciousness is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘visual consciousness is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘visual consciousness is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘auditory consciousness is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘auditory consciousness is [F.297.b] happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘auditory consciousness is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘auditory consciousness is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘auditory consciousness is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘auditory consciousness is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘auditory consciousness is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘auditory consciousness is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘auditory consciousness is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘olfactory consciousness is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘olfactory consciousness is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘olfactory consciousness is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘olfactory consciousness is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘olfactory consciousness is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘olfactory consciousness is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘olfactory consciousness is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘olfactory consciousness is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘olfactory consciousness is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘gustatory consciousness is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘gustatory consciousness [F.298.a] is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘gustatory consciousness is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘gustatory consciousness is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘gustatory consciousness is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘gustatory consciousness is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘gustatory consciousness is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘gustatory consciousness is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘gustatory consciousness is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘tactile consciousness is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tactile consciousness is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tactile consciousness is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tactile consciousness is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tactile consciousness is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tactile consciousness is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tactile consciousness is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘tactile consciousness is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘tactile consciousness is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘mental consciousness is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mental consciousness is [F.298.b] happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mental consciousness is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mental consciousness is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mental consciousness is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mental consciousness is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mental consciousness is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mental consciousness is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘mental consciousness is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘visually compounded sensory contact is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘visually compounded sensory contact is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘visually compounded sensory contact is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘visually compounded sensory contact is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘visually compounded sensory contact is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘visually compounded sensory contact is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘visually compounded sensory contact is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘visually compounded sensory contact is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘visually compounded sensory contact is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘aurally compounded sensory contact is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘aurally compounded sensory contact is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach [F.299.a] the Dharma that ‘aurally compounded sensory contact is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘aurally compounded sensory contact is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘aurally compounded sensory contact is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘aurally compounded sensory contact is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘aurally compounded sensory contact is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘aurally compounded sensory contact is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘aurally compounded sensory contact is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘nasally compounded sensory contact is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘nasally compounded sensory contact is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘nasally compounded sensory contact is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘nasally compounded sensory contact is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘nasally compounded sensory contact is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘nasally compounded sensory contact is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘nasally compounded sensory contact is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘nasally compounded sensory contact is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘nasally compounded sensory contact is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘lingually compounded sensory contact is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘lingually compounded sensory contact is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘lingually compounded sensory contact is a self’ or ‘nonself’; [F.299.b] will not teach the Dharma that ‘lingually compounded sensory contact is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘lingually compounded sensory contact is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘lingually compounded sensory contact is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘lingually compounded sensory contact is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘lingually compounded sensory contact is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘lingually compounded sensory contact is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘corporeally compounded sensory contact is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘corporeally compounded sensory contact is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘corporeally compounded sensory contact is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘corporeally compounded sensory contact is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘corporeally compounded sensory contact is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘corporeally compounded sensory contact is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘corporeally compounded sensory contact is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘corporeally compounded sensory contact is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘corporeally compounded sensory contact is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘mentally compounded sensory contact is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mentally compounded sensory contact is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mentally compounded sensory contact is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mentally compounded sensory contact [F.300.a] is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mentally compounded sensory contact is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mentally compounded sensory contact is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mentally compounded sensory contact is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘mentally compounded sensory contact is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘mentally compounded sensory contact is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact [F.300.b] are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings [F.301.a] conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach [F.301.b] the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the earth element is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the earth element [F.302.a] is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the earth element is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the earth element is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the earth element is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the earth element is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the earth element is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the earth element is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the earth element is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the water element is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the water element is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the water element is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the water element is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the water element is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the water element is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the water element is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the water element is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the water element is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the fire element is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the fire element is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the fire element is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the fire element [F.302.b] is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the fire element is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the fire element is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the fire element is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the fire element is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the fire element is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the wind element is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the wind element is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the wind element is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the wind element is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the wind element is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the wind element is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the wind element is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the wind element is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the wind element is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the space element is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the space element is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the space element is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the space element is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the space element is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the space element [F.303.a] is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the space element is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the space element is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the space element is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the consciousness element is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the consciousness element is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the consciousness element is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the consciousness element is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the consciousness element is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the consciousness element is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the consciousness element is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the consciousness element is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the consciousness element is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘ignorance is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘ignorance is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘ignorance is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘ignorance is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘ignorance is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘ignorance is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; [F.303.b] will not teach the Dharma that ‘ignorance is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘ignorance is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘ignorance is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘formative predispositions are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘formative predispositions are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘formative predispositions are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘formative predispositions are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘formative predispositions are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘formative predispositions are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘formative predispositions are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘formative predispositions are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘formative predispositions are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘consciousness is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘consciousness is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘consciousness is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘consciousness is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘consciousness is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘consciousness is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘consciousness is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘consciousness is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘consciousness is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘name and form [F.304.a] are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘name and form are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘name and form are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘name and form are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘name and form are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘name and form are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘name and form are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘name and form are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘name and form are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the six sense fields are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the six sense fields are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the six sense fields are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the six sense fields are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the six sense fields are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the six sense fields are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the six sense fields are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the six sense fields are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the six sense fields are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘sensory contact is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sensory contact is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sensory contact is a self’ or [F.304.b] ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sensory contact is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sensory contact is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sensory contact is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sensory contact is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sensory contact is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘sensory contact is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘sensation is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sensation is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sensation is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sensation is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sensation is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sensation is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sensation is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘sensation is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘sensation is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘craving is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘craving is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘craving is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘craving is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘craving is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘craving is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘craving is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘craving is future’; and will not teach [F.305.a] the Dharma that ‘craving is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘grasping is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘grasping is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘grasping is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘grasping is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘grasping is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘grasping is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘grasping is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘grasping is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘grasping is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the rebirth process is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the rebirth process is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the rebirth process is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the rebirth process is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the rebirth process is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the rebirth process is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the rebirth process is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the rebirth process is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the rebirth process is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘birth is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘birth is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘birth is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘birth is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; [F.305.b] will not teach the Dharma that ‘birth is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘birth is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘birth is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘birth is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘birth is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘aging and death are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘aging and death are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘aging and death are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘aging and death are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘aging and death are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘aging and death are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘aging and death are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘aging and death are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘aging and death are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of generosity is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of generosity is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of generosity is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of generosity is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of generosity is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of generosity is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of generosity is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of generosity is [F.306.a] future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of generosity is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of ethical discipline is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of ethical discipline is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of ethical discipline is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of ethical discipline is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of ethical discipline is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of ethical discipline is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of ethical discipline is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of ethical discipline is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of ethical discipline is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of tolerance is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of tolerance is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of tolerance is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of tolerance is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of tolerance is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of tolerance is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of tolerance is [F.306.b] past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of tolerance is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of tolerance is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of perseverance is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of perseverance is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of perseverance is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of perseverance is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of perseverance is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of perseverance is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of perseverance is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of perseverance is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of perseverance is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of meditative concentration is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of meditative concentration is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of meditative concentration is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of meditative concentration is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of meditative concentration is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of meditative concentration [F.307.a] is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of meditative concentration is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of meditative concentration is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of meditative concentration is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of wisdom is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of wisdom is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of wisdom is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of wisdom is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of wisdom is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of wisdom is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of wisdom is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of wisdom is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the perfection of wisdom is present.’ [B21]
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of internal phenomena is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of internal phenomena is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of internal phenomena is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach [F.307.b] the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of internal phenomena is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of internal phenomena is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of internal phenomena is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of internal phenomena is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of internal phenomena is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of internal phenomena is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of external phenomena is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of external phenomena is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of external phenomena is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of external phenomena is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of external phenomena is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of external phenomena is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of external phenomena is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of external phenomena is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of external phenomena is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that [F.308.a] ‘the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of emptiness is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of emptiness is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of emptiness is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of emptiness is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of emptiness is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of emptiness is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of emptiness is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of emptiness is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of emptiness is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of great extent is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of great extent is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of great extent is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of great extent is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of great extent is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of great extent is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of great extent is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of great extent is future’; and will not teach [F.308.b] the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of great extent is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of ultimate reality is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of ultimate reality is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of ultimate reality is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of ultimate reality is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of ultimate reality is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of ultimate reality is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of ultimate reality is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of ultimate reality is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of ultimate reality is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is [F.309.a] permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of the unlimited is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of the unlimited is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of the unlimited is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of the unlimited is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of the unlimited is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of the unlimited is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of the unlimited is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of the unlimited is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of the unlimited is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that [F.309.b] ‘the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of nonexclusion is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of nonexclusion is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of nonexclusion is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of nonexclusion is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of nonexclusion is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of nonexclusion is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of nonexclusion is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of nonexclusion is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of nonexclusion is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of an inherent nature is permanent’ [F.310.a] or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of inherent nature is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of inherent nature is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of inherent nature is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of inherent nature is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of inherent nature is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of inherent nature is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of inherent nature is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of inherent nature is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of all phenomena is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of all phenomena is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of all phenomena is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of all phenomena is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of all phenomena is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of all phenomena is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of all phenomena is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of all phenomena is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of all phenomena is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; [F.310.b] will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of nonentities is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of nonentities [F.311.a] is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of nonentities is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of nonentities is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of nonentities is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of nonentities is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of nonentities is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of nonentities is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of nonentities is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of essential nature is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of essential nature is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of essential nature is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of essential nature is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of essential nature is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of essential nature is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of essential nature is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of essential nature is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of essential nature is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that [F.311.b] ‘the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the applications of mindfulness are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the applications of mindfulness are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the applications of mindfulness are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the applications of mindfulness are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the applications of mindfulness are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the applications of mindfulness are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the applications of mindfulness are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the applications of mindfulness are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the applications of mindfulness are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the correct exertions are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the correct exertions [F.312.a] are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the correct exertions are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the correct exertions are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the correct exertions are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the correct exertions are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the correct exertions are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the correct exertions are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the correct exertions are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the supports for miraculous ability are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the supports for miraculous ability are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the supports for miraculous ability are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the supports for miraculous ability are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the supports for miraculous ability are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the supports for miraculous ability are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the supports for miraculous ability are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the supports for miraculous ability are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the supports for miraculous ability are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the faculties are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the faculties are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; [F.312.b] will not teach the Dharma that ‘the faculties are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the faculties are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the faculties are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the faculties are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the faculties are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the faculties are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the faculties are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the powers are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the powers are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the powers are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the powers are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the powers are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the powers are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the powers are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the powers are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the powers are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the branches of enlightenment are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the branches of enlightenment are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the branches of enlightenment are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the branches of enlightenment are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach [F.313.a] the Dharma that ‘the branches of enlightenment are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the branches of enlightenment are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the branches of enlightenment are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the branches of enlightenment are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the branches of enlightenment are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the noble eightfold path is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the noble eightfold path is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the noble eightfold path is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the noble eightfold path is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the noble eightfold path is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the noble eightfold path is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the noble eightfold path is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the noble eightfold path is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the noble eightfold path is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the truths of the noble ones are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the truths of the noble ones are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the truths of the noble ones are a self’ or ‘nonself’; [F.313.b] will not teach the Dharma that ‘the truths of the noble ones are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the truths of the noble ones are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the truths of the noble ones are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the truths of the noble ones are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the truths of the noble ones are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the truths of the noble ones are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the meditative concentrations are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the meditative concentrations are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the meditative concentrations are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the meditative concentrations are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the meditative concentrations are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the meditative concentrations are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the meditative concentrations are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the meditative concentrations are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the meditative concentrations are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the immeasurable attitudes are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the immeasurable attitudes are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the immeasurable attitudes are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the immeasurable attitudes are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not [F.314.a] teach the Dharma that ‘the immeasurable attitudes are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the immeasurable attitudes are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the immeasurable attitudes are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the immeasurable attitudes are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the immeasurable attitudes are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the formless absorptions are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the formless absorptions are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the formless absorptions are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the formless absorptions are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the formless absorptions are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the formless absorptions are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the formless absorptions are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the formless absorptions are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the formless absorptions are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the eight liberations are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the eight liberations are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the eight liberations are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach [F.314.b] the Dharma that ‘the eight liberations are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the eight liberations are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the eight liberations are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the eight liberations are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the eight liberations are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the eight liberations are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the nine serial steps of meditative absorption are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness, [F.315.a] signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the extrasensory powers are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the extrasensory powers are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the extrasensory powers are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the extrasensory powers are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the extrasensory powers are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the extrasensory powers are fettered,’ [F.315.b] or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the extrasensory powers are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the extrasensory powers are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the extrasensory powers are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the meditative stabilities are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the meditative stabilities are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the meditative stabilities are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the meditative stabilities are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the meditative stabilities are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the meditative stabilities are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the meditative stabilities are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the meditative stabilities are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the meditative stabilities are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the dhāraṇī gateways are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the dhāraṇī gateways are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the dhāraṇī gateways are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the dhāraṇī gateways are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the dhāraṇī gateways are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the dhāraṇī gateways are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the dhāraṇī gateways are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the dhāraṇī gateways are future’; [F.316.a] and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the dhāraṇī gateways are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the ten powers of the tathāgatas are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the ten powers of the tathāgatas are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the ten powers of the tathāgatas are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the ten powers of the tathāgatas are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the ten powers of the tathāgatas are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the ten powers of the tathāgatas are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the ten powers of the tathāgatas are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the ten powers of the tathāgatas are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the ten powers of the tathāgatas are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the fearlessnesses are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the fearlessnesses are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the fearlessnesses are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the fearlessnesses are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the fearlessnesses are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the fearlessnesses are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the fearlessnesses are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the fearlessnesses are [F.316.b] future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the fearlessnesses are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the kinds of exact knowledge are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the kinds of exact knowledge are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the kinds of exact knowledge are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the kinds of exact knowledge are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the kinds of exact knowledge are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the kinds of exact knowledge are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the kinds of exact knowledge are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the kinds of exact knowledge are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the kinds of exact knowledge are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘great compassion is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘great compassion is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘great compassion is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘great compassion is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘great compassion is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘great compassion is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘great compassion is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘great compassion is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘great compassion is present.’ [F.317.a]
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the distinct qualities of the buddhas are permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the distinct qualities of the buddhas are happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the distinct qualities of the buddhas are a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the distinct qualities of the buddhas are pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the distinct qualities of the buddhas are at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the distinct qualities of the buddhas are fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the distinct qualities of the buddhas are past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the distinct qualities of the buddhas are future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the distinct qualities of the buddhas are present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘knowledge of all the dharmas is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘knowledge of all the dharmas is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘knowledge of all the dharmas is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘knowledge of all the dharmas is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘knowledge of all the dharmas is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘knowledge of all the dharmas is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘knowledge of all the dharmas is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘knowledge of all the dharmas is [F.317.b] future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘knowledge of all the dharmas is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘the knowledge of the aspects of the path is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the knowledge of the aspects of the path is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the knowledge of the aspects of the path is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the knowledge of the aspects of the path is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the knowledge of the aspects of the path is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the knowledge of the aspects of the path is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the knowledge of the aspects of the path is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘the knowledge of the aspects of the path is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘the knowledge of the aspects of the path is present.’
“He will not teach the Dharma that ‘all-aspect omniscience is permanent’ or ‘impermanent’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘all-aspect omniscience is happiness’ or ‘suffering’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘all-aspect omniscience is a self’ or ‘nonself’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘all-aspect omniscience is pleasant’ or ‘unpleasant’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘all-aspect omniscience is at peace’ or ‘not at peace’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘all-aspect omniscience is fettered,’ or ‘liberated’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘all-aspect omniscience is past’; will not teach the Dharma that ‘all-aspect omniscience [F.318.a] is future’; and will not teach the Dharma that ‘all-aspect omniscience is present.’ ”
Subhūti then asked, “Blessed Lord, how then will the bodhisattva great being Maitreya teach the Dharma, having fully awakened to unsurpassed complete enlightenment? And when he teaches, what will he teach?”
The Blessed One replied, “He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘physical forms are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘feelings are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘perceptions are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘formative predispositions are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘consciousness is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the eyes are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the ears are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the nose is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the tongue is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the body is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the mental faculty is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘sights are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘sounds are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘odors are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, [F.318.b] that ‘tastes are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘tangibles are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘mental phenomena are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘visual consciousness is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘auditory consciousness is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘olfactory consciousness is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘gustatory consciousness is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘tactile consciousness is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘mental consciousness is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘visually compounded sensory contact is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘aurally compounded sensory contact is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘nasally compounded sensory contact is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘lingually compounded sensory contact is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘corporeally compounded sensory contact is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘mentally compounded sensory contact is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, [F.319.a] that ‘feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the earth element is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the water element is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the fire element is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the wind element are is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the space element is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the consciousness element is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘ignorance is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘formative predispositions are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘consciousness is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘name and form are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the six sense fields are absolute purity.’ [F.319.b] He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘sensory contact is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘sensation is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘craving is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘grasping is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the rebirth process is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘birth is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘aging and death are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the perfection of generosity is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the perfection of ethical discipline is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the perfection of tolerance is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the perfection of perseverance is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the perfection of meditative concentration is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the perfection of wisdom is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness of internal phenomena is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness of external phenomena is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness of emptiness [F.320.a] is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness of great extent is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness of ultimate reality is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness of the unlimited is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness of nonexclusion is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness of inherent nature is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness of all phenomena is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness of nonentities is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness of essential nature is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the applications of mindfulness are absolute purity.’ He will teach [F.320.b] the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the correct exertions are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the supports for miraculous ability are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the faculties are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the powers are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the branches of enlightenment are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the noble eightfold path is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the truths of the noble ones are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the meditative concentrations are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the immeasurable attitudes are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the formless absorptions are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the liberations are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the serial steps of meditative absorption are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the extrasensory powers are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the meditative stabilities are absolute purity.’ [F.321.a] He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the dhāraṇī gateways are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the powers of the tathāgatas are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the fearlessnesses are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the kinds of exact knowledge are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘great compassion is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the distinct qualities of the buddhas are absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the fruit of having entered the stream is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the fruit of once-returner is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the fruit of non-returner is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘arhatship is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘individual enlightenment is absolute purity.’ He will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘the knowledge of aspects of the path is absolute purity.’ And he will teach the Dharma of absolute purity, that ‘all-aspect omniscience is absolute purity.’ ” [B22]
“Blessed Lord, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity,” said Subhūti. [F.321.b]
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of physical forms, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of feelings, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of perceptions, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of formative predispositions, and the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of consciousness. The perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the eyes, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the ears, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the nose, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the tongue, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the body, and the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the mental faculty. The perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of sights, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of sounds, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of odors, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of tastes, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of tangibles, and the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of mental phenomena. The perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of visual consciousness, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity [F.322.a] owing to the utter purity of auditory consciousness, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of olfactory consciousness, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of gustatory consciousness, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of tactile consciousness, and the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of mental consciousness. The perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of visually compounded sensory contact, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of aurally compounded sensory contact, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of nasally compounded sensory contact, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of lingually compounded sensory contact, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of corporeally compounded sensory contact, and the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of mentally compounded sensory contact. The perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity [F.322.b] owing to the utter purity of feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact, and the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact. The perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the earth element, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the water element, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the fire element, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the wind element, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the space element, and the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the consciousness element. The perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of ignorance, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of formative predispositions, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of consciousness, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of name and form, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the six sense fields, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of sensory contact, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of sensation, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of craving, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of grasping, the perfection of wisdom [F.323.a] is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the rebirth process, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of birth, and the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of aging and death. The perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the perfection of generosity, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the perfection of ethical discipline, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the perfection of tolerance, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the perfection of perseverance, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the perfection of meditative concentration, and the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the perfection of wisdom. The perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of internal phenomena, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of external phenomena, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of external and internal phenomena, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of emptiness, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of great extent, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of ultimate reality, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of conditioned phenomena, [F.323.b] the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of the unlimited, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of nonexclusion, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of inherent nature, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of all phenomena, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of nonentities, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of essential nature, and the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities. The perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the applications of mindfulness, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the correct exertions, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the supports for miraculous ability, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the faculties, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity [F.324.a] of the powers, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the branches of enlightenment, and the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the noble eightfold path. The perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the truths of the noble ones, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the meditative concentrations, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the immeasurable attitudes, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the formless absorptions, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the liberations, and the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the serial steps of meditative absorption. The perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the extrasensory powers, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the meditative stabilities, and the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the dhāraṇī gateways. The perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the powers of the tathāgatas, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the fearlessnesses, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the kinds of exact knowledge, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of great compassion, [F.324.b] and the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas. The perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the fruit of having entered the stream, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the fruit of once-returner, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the fruit of non-returner, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of arhatship, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of individual enlightenment, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of the knowledge of the aspects of the path, and the perfection of wisdom is utter purity owing to the utter purity of all-aspect omniscience.”
“Blessed Lord,” asked Subhūti, “how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of physical forms, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of feelings, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of perceptions, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of formative predispositions, and how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of consciousness? How is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the eyes, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the ears, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity [F.325.a] of the nose, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the tongue, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the body, and how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the mental faculty? How is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of sights, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of sounds, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of odors, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of tastes, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of tangibles, and how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of mental phenomena? How is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of visual consciousness, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of auditory consciousness, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of olfactory consciousness, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of gustatory consciousness, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of tactile consciousness, and how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of mental consciousness? [F.325.b] How is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of visually compounded sensory contact, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of aurally compounded sensory contact, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of nasally compounded sensory contact, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of lingually compounded sensory contact, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of corporeally compounded sensory contact, and how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of mentally compounded sensory contact? How is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact, and how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact? How is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the earth element, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the water element, how is the perfection of wisdom [F.326.a] utter purity owing to the utter purity of the fire element, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the wind element, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the space element, and how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the consciousness element? How is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of ignorance, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of formative predispositions, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of consciousness, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of name and form, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the six sense fields, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of sensory contact, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of sensation, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of craving, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of grasping, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the rebirth process, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of birth, and how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of aging and death? How is the perfection of wisdom [F.326.b] utter purity owing to the utter purity of the perfection of generosity, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the perfection of ethical discipline, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the perfection of tolerance, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the perfection of perseverance, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the perfection of meditative concentration, and how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the perfection of wisdom? How is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of internal phenomena, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of external phenomena, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of external and internal phenomena, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of emptiness, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of great extent, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of ultimate reality, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of conditioned phenomena, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of [F.327.a] the emptiness of the unlimited, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of nonexclusion, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of inherent nature, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of all phenomena, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of nonentities, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of essential nature, and how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities? How is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the applications of mindfulness, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the correct exertions, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the supports for miraculous ability, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the faculties, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the powers, how is the perfection of wisdom [F.327.b] utter purity owing to the utter purity of the branches of enlightenment, and how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the noble eightfold path? How is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the truths of the noble ones, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the meditative concentrations, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the immeasurable attitudes, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the formless absorptions, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the liberations, and how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the serial steps of meditative absorption? How is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the extrasensory powers, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the meditative stabilities, and how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the dhāraṇī gateways. How is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the powers of the tathāgatas, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the fearlessnesses, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to [F.328.a] the utter purity of the kinds of exact knowledge, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of great compassion, and how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas? How is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the fruit of having entered the stream, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the fruit of once-returner, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the fruit of non-returner, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of arhatship, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of individual enlightenment, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of the knowledge of the aspects of the path, and how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity owing to the utter purity of all-aspect omniscience?”
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of physical forms is the utter purity of physical forms; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of feelings is the utter purity of feelings; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of perceptions is the utter purity of perceptions; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of [F.328.b] formative predispositions is the utter purity of formative predispositions; and the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of consciousness is the utter purity of consciousness. The nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the eyes is the utter purity of the eyes; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the ears is the utter purity of the ears; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the nose is the utter purity of the nose; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the tongue is the utter purity of the tongue; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the body is the utter purity of the body; and the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the mental faculty is the utter purity of the mental faculty. The nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of sights is the utter purity of sights; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of sounds is the utter purity of sounds; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of odors is the utter purity of odors; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of tastes is the utter purity of tastes; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of tangibles [F.329.a] is the utter purity of tangibles; and the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of mental phenomena is the utter purity of mental phenomena. The nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of visual consciousness is the utter purity of visual consciousness; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of auditory consciousness is the utter purity of auditory consciousness; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of olfactory consciousness is the utter purity of olfactory consciousness; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of gustatory consciousness is the utter purity of gustatory consciousness; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of tactile consciousness is the utter purity of tactile consciousness; and the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of mental consciousness is the utter purity of mental consciousness. The nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of visually compounded sensory contact is the utter purity of visually compounded sensory contact; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of aurally compounded sensory contact is the utter purity of aurally compounded sensory contact; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification [F.329.b] of nasally compounded sensory contact is the utter purity of nasally compounded sensory contact; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of lingually compounded sensory contact is the utter purity of lingually compounded sensory contact; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of corporeally compounded sensory contact is the utter purity of corporeally compounded sensory contact; and the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of mentally compounded sensory contact is the utter purity of mentally compounded sensory contact. The nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact is the utter purity of feelings conditioned by visually compounded sensory contact; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact is the utter purity of feelings conditioned by aurally compounded sensory contact; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact is the utter purity of feelings conditioned by nasally compounded sensory contact; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact is the utter purity of feelings conditioned by lingually compounded sensory contact; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact is the utter purity of feelings conditioned by corporeally compounded sensory contact; and the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, [F.330.a] and nonpurification of feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact is the utter purity of feelings conditioned by mentally compounded sensory contact. The nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the earth element is the utter purity of the earth element; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the water element is the utter purity of the water element; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the fire element is the utter purity of the fire element; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the wind element is the utter purity of the wind element; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the space element is the utter purity of the space element; and the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the consciousness element is the utter purity of the consciousness element. The nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of ignorance is the utter purity of ignorance; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of formative predispositions is the utter purity of formative predispositions; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of consciousness is the utter purity of consciousness; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, [F.330.b] and nonpurification of name and form is the utter purity of name and form; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the six sense fields is the utter purity of the six sense fields; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of sensory contact is the utter purity of sensory contact; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of sensation is the utter purity of sensation; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of craving is the utter purity of craving; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of grasping is the utter purity of grasping; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the rebirth process is the utter purity of the rebirth process; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of birth is the utter purity of birth; and the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of aging and death is the utter purity of aging and death. The nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the perfection of generosity is the utter purity of the perfection of generosity; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the perfection of ethical discipline is the utter purity of the perfection of ethical discipline; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, [F.331.a] and nonpurification of the perfection of tolerance is the utter purity of the perfection of tolerance; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the perfection of perseverance is the utter purity of the perfection of perseverance; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the perfection of meditative concentration is the utter purity of the perfection of meditative concentration; and the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the perfection of wisdom is the utter purity of the perfection of wisdom. The nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness of internal phenomena is the utter purity of the emptiness of internal phenomena; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness of external phenomena is the utter purity of the emptiness of external phenomena; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is the utter purity of the emptiness of external and internal phenomena; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness of emptiness is the utter purity of the emptiness of emptiness; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness of great extent is the utter purity of the emptiness of great extent; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness of ultimate reality is the utter purity of the emptiness of ultimate reality; [F.331.b] the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is the utter purity of the emptiness of conditioned phenomena; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is the utter purity of the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness of the unlimited is the utter purity of the emptiness of the unlimited; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is the utter purity of the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness of nonexclusion is the utter purity of the emptiness of nonexclusion; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness of inherent nature is the utter purity of the emptiness of inherent nature; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness of all phenomena is the utter purity of the emptiness of all phenomena; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is the utter purity of the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is the utter purity of the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended; the nonarising, [F.332.a] nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness of nonentities is the utter purity of the emptiness of nonentities; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness of essential nature is the utter purity of the emptiness of essential nature; and the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is the utter purity of the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities. The nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the applications of mindfulness is the utter purity of the applications of mindfulness; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the correct exertions is the utter purity of the correct exertions; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the supports for miraculous ability is the utter purity of the supports for miraculous ability; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the faculties is the utter purity of the faculties; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the powers is the utter purity of the powers; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the branches of enlightenment is the utter purity of the branches of enlightenment; and the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the noble eightfold path is [F.332.b] the utter purity of the noble eightfold path. The nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the truths of the noble ones is the utter purity of the truths of the noble ones; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the meditative concentrations is the utter purity of the meditative concentrations; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the immeasurable attitudes is the utter purity of the immeasurable attitudes; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the formless absorptions is the utter purity of the formless absorptions; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the liberations is the utter purity of the liberations; and the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the serial steps of meditative absorption is the utter purity of the serial steps of meditative absorption. The nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation is the utter purity of the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the extrasensory powers is the utter purity of the extrasensory powers; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification [F.333.a] of the meditative stabilities is the utter purity of the meditative stabilities; and the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the dhāraṇī gateways is the utter purity of the dhāraṇī gateways. The nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the powers of the tathāgatas is the utter purity of the powers of the tathāgatas; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the fearlessnesses is the utter purity of the fearlessnesses; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the kinds of exact knowledge is the utter purity of the kinds of exact knowledge; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of great compassion is the utter purity of great compassion; and the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas is the utter purity of the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas. The nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the fruit of having entered the stream is the utter purity of the fruit of having entered the stream; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the fruit of once-returner is the utter purity of the fruit of once-returner; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification [F.333.b] of the fruit of non-returner is the utter purity of the fruit of non-returner; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of arhatship is the utter purity of arhatship; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of individual enlightenment is the utter purity of individual enlightenment; the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of the knowledge of the aspects of the path is the utter purity of the knowledge of the aspects of the path; and the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of all-aspect omniscience is the utter purity of all-aspect omniscience.
“Moreover, Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity because of the utter purity of space.”
“Blessed Lord, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity because of the utter purity of space?” asked Subhūti.
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “space is utter purity because of nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification. Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity because space is unsullied.”
“Blessed Lord, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity because space is unsullied?” asked Subhūti.
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “the perfection of wisdom is utter purity because space cannot be grasped. Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity because space is without [F.334.a] conventional designations.”839
“Blessed Lord, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity because space is without conventional designations?” asked Subhūti.
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “the perfection of wisdom is utter purity because, just like the two sounds when there is an echo in space, space is without conventional designations. Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity because space cannot be expressed.”
“Blessed Lord, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity because space cannot be expressed?” asked Subhūti.
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “just as in space nothing at all can be expressed, similarly, Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity because space cannot be expressed. Moreover, Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity because space cannot be apprehended.”
“Blessed Lord, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity because space cannot be apprehended?” asked Subhūti.
Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “just as in space nothing at all can be apprehended, similarly, Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity because space cannot be apprehended. Moreover, Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom is utter purity because of the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, and nonpurification of all phenomena.”
“Blessed Lord, how is the perfection of wisdom utter purity because of the nonarising, nonceasing, nondefilement, [F.334.b] and nonpurification of all phenomena?” asked Subhūti.
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “the perfection of wisdom is utter purity because all phenomena are absolutely pure.”
Subhūti then said, “Blessed Lord, if any sons or daughters of good families take up, uphold, recite, and focus their attention correctly on this perfection of wisdom, then, Blessed Lord, they will not suffer from diseases of the eyes, nor will they suffer from diseases of the ears, diseases of the nose, diseases of the tongue, or diseases of the body, nor will their limbs be missing, nor will their bodies become ugly, nor will their bodies become decrepit from old age, nor will those sons or daughters of good families die a terrible death. Many hundreds of thousands of gods will follow behind them, that is to say, the gods of the Cāturmahārājika realm; the gods of the Trayastriṃśa, Yāma, Tuṣita, Nirmāṇarati, Paranirmitavaśavartin, Brahmakāyika, Brahmapurohita, Brahmapārṣadya, Ābha, Parīttābha, Apramāṇābha, Ābhāsvara, Śubha, Parīttaśubha, Apramāṇaśubha, Śubhakṛtsna, Vṛha, Parīttavṛha, Apramāṇavṛha, and Vṛhatphala realms; and the gods of the Avṛha, Atapa, Sudṛśa, Sudarśana, and Akaniṣṭha realms will follow behind them. On the eighth, the fourteenth, and the fifteenth,840 great hosts of the gods will congregate in the places where those sons or daughters of good families who teach the Dharma reveal this perfection of wisdom. And when those sons or daughters of good families reveal this perfection of wisdom, they will greatly increase their merit. [F.335.a] Indeed, very many immeasurable, countless, inconceivable, incomparable, unappraisable, and unbounded stocks of merit of those sons or daughters of good families will really increase.”
“So it is, Subhūti, so it is!” said the Blessed One. “Those sons or daughters of good families who reveal this perfection of wisdom before the assembly of gods on the eighth, the fourteenth, and the fifteenth are sons or daughters of good families who will greatly increase their merit. Indeed, the very many immeasurable, countless, inconceivable, incomparable, unappraisable, and unbounded stocks of merit of those sons or daughters of good families will really increase. If you ask why, Subhūti, it is because this perfection of wisdom is a great jewel. Subhūti, this great jewel, the perfection of wisdom, is the one that liberates beings from the hells, and liberates them from the animal realm, the world of Yama, and the impoverished states of human beings and gods. It causes great and lofty royal families to appear, causes great and lofty priestly families to appear, and causes great and lofty householder families to appear; causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Cāturmahārājika realm to appear, causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Trayastriṃśa realm to appear, causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Yāma realm appear, causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Tuṣita realm to appear, causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Nirmāṇarati realm to appear, and causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Paranirmitavaśavartin realm to appear; causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Brahmakāyika realm to appear, cause rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Brahmapurohita realm to appear, causes rebirth in the sphere [F.335.b] of the gods of the Brahmapārṣadya realm to appear, and causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Mahābrahmā realm to appear, causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Ābha realm to appear, causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Parīttābha realm to appear, causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Apramāṇābha realm to appear, and causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Ābhāsvara realm to appear; causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Śubha realm to appear, causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Parīttaśubha realm to appear, causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Apramāṇaśubha realm to appear, and causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Śubhakṛtsna realm to appear; causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Vṛha realm to appear, causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Parīttavṛha realm to appear, causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Apramāṇavṛha realm to appear, and causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Vṛhatphala realm to appear; causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Avṛha realm to appear, causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Atapa realm to appear, causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Sudṛśa realm to appear, causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Sudarśana realm to appear, and causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the Akaniṣṭha realm to appear; causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the sphere of infinite space to appear, causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the sphere of infinite consciousness to appear, causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the sphere of nothing-at-all to appear, and causes rebirth in the sphere of the gods of the sphere of neither perception nor nonperception to appear; and causes the fruit of having entered the stream to appear, causes the fruit of once-returner to appear, causes the fruit of non-returner to appear, causes arhatship to appear, causes individual enlightenment to appear, and causes perfect, complete enlightenment to appear.
“If you ask why, it is because the path of the ten virtuous actions is revealed extensively by this perfection of wisdom. Having trained in them, great and lofty royal families exist, great and lofty priestly families exist, [F.336.a] and great and lofty householder families exist; the gods of the Cāturmahārājika realm exist, the gods of the Trayastriṃśa realm exist, the gods of the Yāma realm exist, the gods of the Tuṣita realm exist, the gods of the Nirmāṇarati realm exist, and the gods of the Paranirmitavaśavartin realm exist; the gods of the Brahmakāyika realm exist, the gods of the Brahmapurohita realm exist, the gods of the Brahmapārṣadya realm exist, and the gods of the Mahābrahmā realm exist; the gods of the Ābha realm exist, the gods of the Parīttābha realm exist, the gods of the Apramāṇābha realm exist, and the gods of the Ābhāsvara realm exist; the gods of the Śubha realm exist, the gods of the Parīttaśubha realm exist, the gods of the Apramāṇaśubha realm exist, and the gods of the Śubhakṛtsna realm exist; the gods of the Vṛha realm exist, the gods of the Parīttavṛha realm exist, the gods of the Apramāṇavṛha realm exist, and the gods of the Vṛhatphala realm exist; the gods of the Avṛha realm exist, the gods of the Atapa realm exist, the gods of the Sudṛśa realm exist, the gods of the Sudarśana realm exist, and the gods of the Akaniṣṭha realm exist; the gods of the sphere of infinite space exist, the gods of the sphere of infinite consciousness exist, the gods of the sphere of nothing-at-all exist, and the gods of the sphere of neither perception nor nonperception exist; and the fruit of having entered the stream exists, the fruit of once-returner exists, the fruit of non-returner exists, arhatship exists, individual enlightenment exists, and unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment exists.
“If this perfection of wisdom exists, the four meditative concentrations exist, the four immeasurable attitudes exist, and the four formless absorptions exist; [F.336.b] the applications of mindfulness exist, the correct exertions exist, the supports for miraculous ability exist, the faculties exist, the powers exist, the branches of enlightenment exist, and the noble eightfold path exists; the perfection of generosity exists, the perfection of ethical discipline exists, the perfection of tolerance exists, the perfection of perseverance exists, the perfection of meditative concentration exists, and the perfection of wisdom exists; the emptiness of internal phenomena exists, the emptiness of external phenomena exists, the emptiness of external and internal phenomena exists, the emptiness of emptiness exists, the emptiness of great extent exists, the emptiness of ultimate reality exists, the emptiness of conditioned phenomena exists, the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena exists, the emptiness of the unlimited exists, the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end exists, the emptiness of nonexclusion exists, the emptiness of inherent nature exists, the emptiness of all phenomena exists, the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics exists, the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended exists, the emptiness of nonentities exists, the emptiness of essential nature exists, and the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities exists; the four truths of the noble ones exist, the four meditative concentrations exist, the four immeasurable attitudes exist, the four formless absorptions exist, the eight liberations exist, the nine serial steps of meditative absorption exist, the three gateways to liberation exist, the extrasensory powers exist, the meditative stabilities exist, the dhāraṇī gateways exist, the ten powers of the tathāgatas exist, the four fearlessnesses exist, [F.337.a] the four kinds of exact knowledge exist, great loving kindness exists, great compassion exists, and the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas exist; and knowledge of all the dharmas exists, the knowledge of the aspects of the path exists, and all-aspect omniscience exists.
“Moreover, all these phenomena are revealed extensively by this perfection of wisdom in this manner. When they have trained in it, great and lofty royal families exist, great and lofty priestly families exist, and great and lofty householder families exist; the gods of the Cāturmahārājika realm exist, the gods of the Trayastriṃśa realm exist, the gods of the Yāma realm exist, the gods of the Tuṣita realm exist, the gods of the Nirmāṇarati realm exist, and the gods of the Paranirmitavaśavartin realm exist; the gods of the Brahmakāyika realm exist, the gods of the Brahmapurohita realm exist, the gods of the Brahmapārṣadya realm exist, and the gods of the Mahābrahmā realm exist; the gods of the Ābha realm exist, the gods of the Parīttābha realm exist, the gods of the Apramāṇābha realm exist, and the gods of the Ābhāsvara realm exist; the gods of the Śubha realm exist, the gods of the Parīttaśubha realm exist, the gods of the Apramāṇaśubha realm exist, and the gods of the Śubhakṛtsna realm exist; the gods of the Vṛha realm exist, the gods of the Parīttavṛha realm exist, the gods of the Apramāṇavṛha realm exist, and the gods of the Vṛhatphala realm exist; the gods of the Avṛha realm exist, the gods of the Atapa realm exist, the gods of the Sudṛśa realm exist, the gods of the Sudarśana realm exist, and the gods of the Akaniṣṭha realm exist; the gods of the sphere of infinite space exist, the gods of the sphere of infinite consciousness exist, the gods of the sphere of nothing-at-all exist, [F.337.b] and the gods of the sphere of neither perception nor nonperception exist; and those who have entered the stream exist, once-returners exist, non-returners exist, arhats exist, pratyekabuddhas exist, bodhisattvas exist, and the tathāgatas, arhats, perfectly complete buddhas exist. Therefore, it is called the great jewel perfection.
“In that great jewel perfection there is no phenomenon at all that arises or ceases, or is defiled or purified, or is taken up or rejected. If you ask why, it is because there are no such phenomena that could arise or cease, or be defiled or purified, or be taken up or rejected. Subhūti, in this great jewel perfection, virtuous or nonvirtuous, mundane or supramundane, contaminated or uncontaminated, or conditioned or unconditioned phenomena cannot be apprehended at all. For this reason, also, Subhūti, this great jewel perfection cannot be apprehended.
“Subhūti, this great jewel perfection is not sullied by any phenomenon at all. If you ask why, it is because such a phenomenon by which it might be sullied cannot be apprehended. Therefore, Subhūti, this perfection is a perfection that is unsullied.
“Subhūti, if, when bodhisattva great beings are practicing the perfection of wisdom, they do not perceive in that manner, do not conceptualize in that manner, do not apprehend in that manner, and do not elaborate in that manner, they are practicing the perfection of wisdom. They are cultivating the perfection of wisdom. They please the lord buddhas. [F.338.a] Bringing the lord buddhas directly to mind, they proceed from buddhafield to buddhafield to serve, respect, honor, and worship the lord buddhas. They proceed from buddhafield to buddhafield bringing beings to maturity and refining a buddhafield.
“As for this perfection of wisdom, Subhūti, it does not teach, reveal, disclose, cause to be taken up, make emerge, make arise, make cease, make defiled, make pure, make decline, make increase, or make past, future, or present any phenomenon at all.
“Subhūti, such a perfection of wisdom as this does not cause you to transcend the realm of desire and does not cause you to stay in it, does not cause you to transcend the realm of form and does not cause you to stay in it, and does not cause you to transcend the realm of formlessness and does not cause you to stay in it. [B23]
“It neither brings about nor prevents the perfection of generosity, neither brings about nor prevents the perfection of ethical discipline, neither brings about nor prevents the perfection of tolerance, neither brings about nor prevents the perfection of perseverance, neither brings about nor prevents the perfection of meditative concentration, and neither brings about nor prevents the perfection of wisdom. It neither brings about nor prevents [F.338.b] the emptiness of internal phenomena, neither brings about nor prevents the emptiness of external phenomena, neither brings about nor prevents the emptiness of external and internal phenomena, neither brings about nor prevents the emptiness of emptiness, neither brings about nor prevents the emptiness of great extent, neither brings about nor prevents the emptiness of ultimate reality, neither brings about nor prevents the emptiness of conditioned phenomena, neither brings about nor prevents the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena, neither brings about nor prevents the emptiness of the unlimited, neither brings about nor prevents the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end, neither brings about nor prevents the emptiness of nonexclusion, neither brings about nor prevents the emptiness of inherent nature, neither brings about nor prevents the emptiness of all phenomena, neither brings about nor prevents the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics, neither brings about nor prevents the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended, neither brings about nor prevents the emptiness of nonentities, neither brings about nor prevents the emptiness of essential nature, and neither brings about nor prevents the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities.
“It neither brings about nor prevents the applications of mindfulness, neither brings about nor prevents the correct exertions, neither brings about nor prevents the supports for miraculous ability, neither brings about nor prevents the faculties, neither brings about nor prevents the powers, neither brings about nor prevents the branches of enlightenment, and neither brings about nor prevents the noble eightfold path. It neither brings about nor prevents the truths of the noble ones, neither brings about nor prevents the meditative concentrations, neither brings about nor prevents the immeasurable attitudes, neither brings about [F.339.a] nor prevents the formless absorptions, neither brings about nor prevents the liberations, and neither brings about nor prevents the serial steps of meditative absorption. It neither brings about nor prevents the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation, neither brings about nor prevents the extrasensory powers, neither brings about nor prevents the meditative stabilities, and neither brings about nor prevents the dhāraṇī gateways. It neither brings about nor prevents the powers of the tathāgatas, neither brings about nor prevents the fearlessnesses, neither brings about nor prevents the kinds of exact knowledge, neither brings about nor prevents great loving kindness, neither brings about nor prevents great compassion, and neither brings about nor prevents the distinct qualities of the buddhas. It neither brings about nor prevents the fruit of having entered the stream, neither brings about nor prevents the fruit of once-returner, neither brings about nor prevents the fruit of non-returner, neither brings about nor prevents arhatship, neither brings about nor prevents individual enlightenment, neither brings about nor prevents the knowledge of the aspects of the path, and neither brings about nor prevents all-aspect omniscience.
“This perfection of wisdom neither prevents the conditioned element, nor brings about the unconditioned element.
“If you ask why, it is because, whether the tathāgatas appear or whether the tathāgatas do not appear, the reality of phenomena as it pertains to phenomena, the realm of phenomena, the abiding nature of phenomena, the maturity of phenomena remains just as it is. It is [F.339.b] the full awakening attained by the tathāgatas and comprehended by them. Having fully awakened, having completely comprehended it; they also describe, teach, explain, analyze, and elucidate it.”
Then many thousands of gods, positioning themselves841 in the sky above, cheered long and loud. They scattered divine flowers—blue lotuses, day lotuses, red lotuses, white lotuses, mandārava flowers, and big mandārava flowers—and they exclaimed, “Ah! Through the teaching of this perfection of wisdom many thousands of gods have gained acceptance that phenomena are nonarising. We are seeing the wheel of the Dharma being turned for the second time in Jambudvīpa!”
Then the Blessed One addressed the elder Subhūti: “Subhūti, owing to the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities, this is not the first, nor is it the second turning of the wheel of the Dharma. This perfection of wisdom has not been established for any Dharma to be turned or not turned.”
“Blessed Lord, what is the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities, owing to which this perfection of wisdom is not established as any Dharma to be turned or not turned?” asked Subhūti.
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “the perfection of wisdom is empty of the perfection of wisdom, the perfection of meditative concentration is empty of the perfection of meditative concentration, the perfection of perseverance is empty of the perfection of perseverance, the perfection of tolerance is empty of the perfection of tolerance, [F.340.a] the perfection of ethical discipline is empty of the perfection of ethical discipline, and perfection of generosity is empty of the perfection of generosity.
“The emptiness of internal phenomena is empty of the emptiness of internal phenomena, the emptiness of external phenomena is empty of the emptiness of external phenomena, the emptiness of external and internal phenomena empty of the emptiness of external and internal phenomena, the emptiness of emptiness is empty of the emptiness of emptiness, the emptiness of great extent is empty of the emptiness of great extent, the emptiness of ultimate reality is empty of the emptiness of ultimate reality, the emptiness of conditioned phenomena is empty of the emptiness of conditioned phenomena, the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena is empty of the emptiness of unconditioned phenomena, the emptiness of the unlimited is empty of the emptiness of the unlimited, the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end is empty of the emptiness of that which has neither beginning nor end, the emptiness of nonexclusion is empty of the emptiness of nonexclusion, the emptiness of inherent nature is empty of the emptiness of inherent nature, the emptiness of all phenomena is empty of the emptiness of all phenomena, the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics is empty of the emptiness of intrinsic defining characteristics, the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended is empty of the emptiness of that which cannot be apprehended, the emptiness of nonentities is empty of the emptiness of nonentities, the emptiness of essential nature is empty of the emptiness of essential nature, and the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities is empty of the emptiness of an essential nature of nonentities.
“The applications of mindfulness are empty of the applications of mindfulness, the correct exertions are empty of the correct exertions, the supports for miraculous ability are empty of the supports for miraculous ability, the faculties are empty of the faculties, the powers are empty of the powers, the branches of enlightenment are empty of the branches of enlightenment, and the noble eightfold [F.340.b] path is empty of the noble eightfold path.
“The truths of the noble ones are empty of the truths of the noble ones, the meditative concentrations are empty of the meditative concentrations, the immeasurable attitudes are empty of the immeasurable attitudes, the formless absorptions are empty of the formless absorptions, the liberations are empty of the liberations, the serial steps of meditative absorption are empty of the serial steps of meditative absorption, the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation are empty of the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation, the extrasensory powers are empty of the extrasensory powers, the meditative stabilities are empty of the meditative stabilities, and the dhāraṇī gateways are empty of the dhāraṇī gateways. The powers of the tathāgatas are empty of the powers of the tathāgatas, the fearlessnesses are empty of the fearlessnesses, the kinds of exact knowledge are empty of the kinds of exact knowledge, great loving kindness is empty of great loving kindness, great compassion is empty of great compassion, and the distinct qualities of the buddhas are empty of the distinct qualities of the buddhas. The fruit of having entered the stream is empty of the fruit of having entered the stream, the fruit of once-returner is empty of the fruit of once-returner, the fruit of non-returner is empty of the fruit of non-returner, arhatship is empty of arhatship, individual enlightenment is empty of individual enlightenment, the knowledge of the aspects of the path is empty of the knowledge of the aspects of the path, and all-aspect omniscience is empty of all-aspect omniscience.” [F.341.a]
“Blessed Lord, this perfection of wisdom of the bodhisattva great beings is great, because the perfection of wisdom is empty of its own essential nature. It is all phenomena empty of all phenomena. Even though bodhisattva great beings dwell in the perfection of wisdom and will fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment, they do not fully awaken to any Dharma at all. Even though they turn the wheel of the Dharma, they do not cause any Dharma to turn, not to turn, or to further turn. They neither see nor do not see any Dharma. If you ask why, it is because the sort of Dharma that is turned, is not turned, or further turns cannot be apprehended; it is because all Dharmas have not been brought into being at all. If you ask why, it is because emptiness does not cause turning or cause not turning. Signlessness does not cause turning or cause not turning. And wishlessness does not cause turning or cause not turning.
“The teaching, explanation, proclamation, establishment, exposition, analysis, interpretation, discussion, elucidation, and revelation of the perfection of wisdom in this manner is the utterly purified teaching of the perfection of wisdom. Nobody has explained this teaching of the perfection of wisdom, nor has anybody grasped it. That which nobody has explained [F.341.b] and nobody has grasped has not been actualized by anybody; and where nobody has directly actualized it, there nobody has passed into final nirvāṇa. Nor is there anyone at all who is worthy of offerings on account of this exposition of the Dharma.”
This completes the twenty-eighth chapter from “The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines.”
Abbreviations
| Bṭ1 | Anonymous/Daṃṣṭrāsena. shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa ’bum gyi rgya cher ’grel (Śatasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitābṛhaṭṭīkā) [Bṛhaṭṭīkā]. Toh 3807, Degé Tengyur vols. 91–92 (shes phyin, na, pa). |
|---|---|
| Bṭ3 | Vasubandhu/Daṃṣṭrāsena. ’phags pa shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa ’bum dang / nyi khri lnga sgong pa dang / khri brgyad stong pa rgya cher bshad pa (Āryaśatasāhasrikāpañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāṣṭādaśa-sāhasrikāprajñāpāramitābṭhaṭṭīkā) [Bṛhaṭṭīkā]. Degé Tengyur vol. 93 (shes phyin, pha), folios 1b–292b. |
| C | Choné (co ne) Kangyur and Tengyur. |
| D | Degé (sde dge) Kangyur and Tengyur. |
| Edg | Edgerton, Franklin. Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Dictionary. New Haven, 1953. |
| Eight Thousand | Conze, Edward. The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines & Its Verse Summary. Bolinas, Calif.: Four Seasons Foundation, 1973. |
| Ghoṣa | Ghoṣa, Pratāpachandra, ed. Śatasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā. Asiatic Society of Bengal. Calcutta, 1902–14. |
| Gilgit | Gilgit Buddhist Manuscripts (revised and enlarged compact facsimile edition). Vol. 1. by Raghu Vira and Lokesh Chandra. Bibliotheca Indo-Buddhica Series No. 150. Delhi 110007: Sri Satguru Publications, a division of Indian Books Center, 1995. |
| K | Peking (pe cing) 1684/1692 Kangyur |
| LSPW | Conze, Edward. The Large Sutra on Perfection Wisdom. Berkeley and Los Angeles, California: University of California Press, 1975. First paperback printing, 1984. |
| MDPL | Conze, Edward. Materials for a Dictionary of the Prajñāpāramitā Literature. Tokyo: Suzuki Research Foundation, 1973. |
| MW | Monier-Williams, Monier. A Sanskrit-English dictionary: Etymologically and Philologically Arranged with Special Reference to Cognate Indo-European Languages. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1899. |
| Mppś | Lamotte, Étienne. Le Traité de la Grande Vertu de Sagesse de Nāgārjuna (Mahāprajñā-pāramitā-śāstra). Vol. I and II: Bibliothèque du Muséon, 18. Louvain: Institut Orientaliste, 1949; reprinted 1967. Vol III, IV and V: Publications de l’Institut Orientaliste de Louvain, 2, 12 and 24. Louvain: Institut Orientaliste, 1970, 1976 and 1980. |
| Mppś English | Gelongma Karma Migme Chodron. The Treatise on the Great Virtue of Wisdom of Nāgārjuna. Gampo Abbey Nova Scotia, 2001. English translation of Étienne Lamotte (1949–80). |
| Mvy | Mahāvyutpatti (bye brag tu rtogs par byed pa chen po. Toh. 4346, Degé Tengyur vol. 306 (bstan bcos sna tshogs, co), folios 1b-131a. |
| N | Narthang (snar thang) Kangyur and Tengyur. |
| PSP | Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā. Edited by Takayasu Kimura. Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin 2007–9 (1-1, 1-2), 1986 (2-3), 1990 (4), 1992 (5), 2006 (6-8). Available online (input by Klaus Wille, Göttingen) at GRETIL. |
| S | Stok Palace (stog pho brang bris ma) Kangyur. |
| Skt | Sanskrit. |
| Tib | Tibetan. |
| Toh | Tōhoku Imperial University A Complete Catalogue of the Tibetan Buddhist Canons. (bkaḥ-ḥgyur and bstan-ḥgyur). Edited by Ui, Hakuju; Suzuki, Munetada; Kanakura, Yenshō; and Taka, Tōkan. Tohoku Imperial University, Sendai, 1934. |
| Z | Zacchetti, Stefano. In Praise of the Light. Bibliotheca Philologica et Philosophica Buddhica, Vol. 8. The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology. Tokyo: Soka University, 2005. |
| le’u brgyad ma | shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag nyi shu lnga pa (Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [Haribhadra’s “Eight Chapters”]. Toh 3790, vols. 82–84 (shes phyin, ga, nga, ca). Citations are from the 1976–79 Karmapae chodhey gyalwae sungrab partun khang edition, first the Tib. vol. letter in italics, followed by the folio and line number. |
| ŚsP | Śatasāhasrikāprajñaparamitā. Edited by Takayasu Kimura. Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin 2009 (II-1), 2010 (II-2, II-3), 2014 (II-4). Available online (input by Klaus Wille, Göttingen) at GRETIL. |
Bibliography
Primary Sources in Tibetan and Sanskrit
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag brgya pa (Śatasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines]. Toh 8, Degé Kangyur vols. 14–25: (’bum, ka), folios 1.b–394.a; (’bum, kha), folios 1.b–402.a; (’bum, ga), folios 1.b–394.a; (’bum, nga), folios 1.b–381.a; (’bum, ca), folios 1.b–395.a; (’bum, cha), folios 1.b–382.a; (’bum, ja), folios 1.b–398.a; (’bum, nya), folios 1.b–399.a; (’bum, ta), folios 1.b–384.a; (’bum, tha), folios 1.b–387.a; (’bum, da), folios 1.b–411.a; and (’bum, a), folios 1.b–395.a.
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag brgya pa (Śatasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines]. bka’ ’gyur (dpe bsdur ma) [Comparative Edition of the Kangyur], krung go’i bod rig pa zhib ’jug ste gnas kyi bka’ bstan dpe sdur khang (The Tibetan Tripitaka Collation Bureau of the China Tibetology Research Center). 108 volumes. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang (China Tibetology Publishing House), 2006–9, vols. 14–25.
Śatasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā [The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines]. Sanskrit texts based on Ghoṣa, Pratāpacandra, Çatasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā: A Theological and Philosophical Discourse of Buddha With His Disciples in A Hundred Thousand Stanzas. Calcutta: Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1902–14 (chapters 1–12); and on Kimura, Takayasu, Śatasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā, II/1–4, 4 vols. Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin, 2009–14. Available as e-texts, Part I and Part II, on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
The Larger Prajñāpāramitā. Sanskrit edition (mostly according to the Gilgit manuscript GBM 175–675, folios 1–27) from Zacchetti, Stefano (2005). In Praise of the Light: A Critical Synoptic Edition with an Annotated Translation of Chapters 1-3 of Dharmarakṣa’s Guang zan jing, Being the Earliest Chinese Translation of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā. Bibliotheca Philologica et Philosophica Buddhica, Vol. 8. The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology. Tokyo: Soka University, 2005. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
The Larger Prajñāpāramitā. Sanskrit edition (Gilgit manuscript folios 202.a.5–205.a.12, GBM 571.5–577.12) from Yoke Meei Choong, Zum Problem der Leerheit (śūnyatā) in der Prajñāpāramitā, Frankfurt: Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 27, Bd. 97, 2006, pp. 109–33. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
Secondary References in Tibetan and Sanskrit
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag nyi shu lnga pa (Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines]. Toh 9, Degé Kangyur vols. 26–28 (shes phyin, nyi khri, ka–a), folios ka.1.b–ga.381.a.
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag nyi shu lnga pa (Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines]. bka’ ’gyur (dpe bsdur ma) [Comparative Edition of the Kangyur], krung go’i bod rig pa zhib ’jug ste gnas kyi bka’ bstan dpe sdur khang (The Tibetan Tripitaka Collation Bureau of the China Tibetology Research Center). 108 volumes. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang (China Tibetology Publishing House), 2006–9, vols. 26–28.
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag nyi shu lnga pa (Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines, the “eight-chapter” (le’u brgyad ma) Tengyur version]. Toh 3790, Degé Tengyur vols. 82–84 (shes phyin, ga–ca), folios ga.1.b–ca.342.a.
Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā [The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines]. Sanskrit text based on the edition by Takayasu Kimura. Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin 2007–9 (1–1, 1–2), 1986 (2–3), 1990 (4), 1992 (5), 2006 (6–8). Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL). Page references: {Ki.}
Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā [The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines]. Dutt, Nalinaksha. Calcutta Oriental Series 28. London: Luzac, 1934. Reprint edition, Sri Satguru Publications, 1986. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL). Page references: {Dt.nn}
Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā [The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines]. Sanskrit text of the Anurādhapura fragment, based on the edition by Oskar von Hinüber, “Sieben Goldblätter einer Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā aus Anurādhapura,” in Nachrichten der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Phil.-Hist.Kl. 1983, pp. 189–207. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
Aṣṭasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā [The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines]. Sanskrit text based on the edition by P. L. Vaidya, in Buddhist Sanskrit Texts, vol. 4. Darbhanga: The Mithila Institute, 1960. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
Daṃṣṭrasena. shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa ’bum pa rgya cher ’grel pa (Śatasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitābṛhaṭṭīkā) [“An Extensive Commentary on The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines”], Toh 3807, Degé Tengyur vols. 91–92. Also in Tengyur Pedurma (TPD) (bstan ’gyur [dpe bsdur ma]), [Comparative Edition of the Tengyur], krung go’i bod rig pa zhib ’jug ste gnas kyi bka’ bstan dpe sdur khang (The Tibetan Tripitaka Collation Bureau of the China Tibetology Research Center). 120 volumes. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang (China Tibetology Publishing House), 1994–2008, vol. 54 (TPD 54), pp. 627–1439, and vol. 55, pp. 2–550.
Denkarma (ldan dkar ma; pho brang stod thang ldan dkar gyi chos ’gyur ro cog gi dkar chag). Toh 4364, Degé Tengyur vol. 206 (sna tshogs, jo), folios 294.b–310.a.
Phangthangma (dkar chag ’phang thang ma). Beijing: mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2003.
Alaksha Tendar (a lag sha bstan dar). shes rab snying po’i ’grel pa don gsal nor bu’i ’od. sku ’bum: sku ’bum byams pa gling. http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/W7303. [BDRC bdr:W7303]. For translation see Lopez 1988.
Butön (bu ston rin chen grub). bde bar gshegs pa’i bstan pa’i gsal byed chos kyi ’byung gnas gsung rab rin po che’i mdzod. In gsung ’bum/_rin chen grub/ zhol par ma/ ldi lir bskyar par brgyab pa/ [The Collected Works of Bu-ston: Edited by Lokesh Chandra from the Collections of Raghu Vira], vol. 24, pp. 633–1056. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1965–71.
Chomden Rigpai Raltri (bcom ldan rig pa’i ral gri). bstan pa rgyas pa rgyan gyi nyi ’od. BDRC MW1CZ1041 (scanned dbu med MS from Drépung) and MW00EGS1017426 (modern computerized version).
Dolpopa (dol po pa shes rab rgyal mtshan). ’bum rdzogs ldan lugs kyi bshad pa. Jo nang dpe tshogs 43. Beijing: mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2014. http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/W8LS18973 . [BDRC bdr:W8LS18973].
Karma Chakmé (gnas mdo karma chags med). yum chen mo shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa’i ’bum tig. In gsung ’bum karma chags med (gnas mdo dpe rnying nyams gso khang), 34:223–50. [nang chen rdzong]: gnas mdo gsang sngags chos ’phel gling gi dpe rnying nyams gso khang, 2010. http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/MW1KG8321_A2E762 . [BDRC bdr:MW1KG8321_A2E762].
Kongtrül Lodrö Thaye (kong sprul blo gros mtha’ yas / yon tan rgya mtsho). shes bya kun khyab [“The Treasury of Knowledge”]. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2002. Translated, along with the auto-commentary, by the Kalu Rinpoche Translation Group in The Treasury of Knowledge series (TOK). Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications, 1995 to 2012. Mentioned here is Ngawang Zangpo 2010 (Books 2, 3, and 4).
Minling Terchen Gyurme Dorje. zab pa dang rgya che ba’i dam pa’i chos kyi thob yig rin chen ’byung gnas dum bu gnyis pa. In vol. 2, gsung ’bum ’gyur med rdo rje. 16 vols. Dehra Dun: D.g. Khochhen Tulku, 1998. Buddhist Digital Resource Center (BDRC), purl.bdrc.io/resource/MW22096. [BDRC bdr:MW22096]
Nordrang Orgyan (nor brang o rgyan). chos rnam kun btus. 3 vols. Beijing: Krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang, 2008.
Olkha Lelung Lobsang Trinlé (’ol kha / dga’ sle lung blo bzang ’phrin las). Narthang Catalog (Detailed). bka’ ’gyur rin po che’i gsung par srid gsum rgyan gcig rdzu ’phrul shing rta’i dkar chag ngo mtshar bkod pa rgya mtsho’i lde mig. Scans in: Narthang Kangyur (snar thang bka’ ’gyur), vol. 102, pp. 663–909. Buddhist Digital Resource Center (BDRC), http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/W22703 [BDRC bdr:W22703]. Transcribed in: bka’ ’gyur (dpe bsdur ma) [Comparative Edition of the Kangyur], krung go’i bod rig pa zhib ’jug ste gnas kyi bka’ bstan dpe sdur khang (The Tibetan Tripitaka Collation Bureau of the China Tibetology Research Center). 108 volumes. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang (China Tibetology Publishing House), 2006–9, vol. 106, pp. 71–306.
Rongtönpa (rong ston shes bya kun rig). sher phyin ’bum TIk. Manduwala, Dehra Dun: Luding Ladrang, Pal Ewam Chodan Ngorpa Centre, 1985. http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/W1KG11807. [BDRC bdr:W1KG11807]. For translation see Martin 2012.
Zhang Yisun et al. bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo. 3 vols. Subsequently reprinted in 2 vols. and 1 vol. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1985. Translated in Nyima and Dorje 2001 (vol. 1).
Secondary References in English and Other Languages
Almogi, Orna. “The Old sNar thang Tibetan Buddhist Canon Revisited, with Special Reference to dBus pa blo gsal’s bsTan ’gyur Catalogue.” Revue d’Etudes Tibétaines 58 (April 2021): 167–207. hal-03213584
Bongard-Levin, G. M., and Shin’ichirō Hori. “A Fragment of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā from Central Asia.” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 19, no. 1 (1996): 19–60.
Brunnhölzl, Karl (2010). Gone Beyond: The Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras, The Ornament of Clear Realization, and its Commentaries in the Tibetan Kagyü Tradition. 2 vols. Ithaca: Snow Lion, 2010 and 2011.
Brunnhölzl, Karl (2012). Groundless Paths: The Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras, The Ornament of Clear Realization, and its Commentaries in the Tibetan Nyingma Tradition. Ithaca: Snow Lion, 2012.
Burchardi, Anne, trans. The Teaching on the Great Compassion of the Tathāgata (Tathāgatamahākaruṇānirdeśa, Toh 147). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2020.
Choong, Yoke Meei. Zum Problem der Leerheit (śūnyatā) in der Prajñāpāramitā. Frankfurt: Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 27, Bd. 97, 2006, pp. 109–33.
Conze, Edward (1962). The Gilgit Manuscript of the Aṣṭādaśasāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā: Chapters 50 to 55 corresponding to the 5th Abhisamaya. SOR 26. Rome: ISMEO, 1962.
Conze, Edward trans. (1973a). Materials for a Dictionary of the Prajñāpāramitā Literature. Tokyo: Suzuki Research Foundation, 1973.
Conze, Edward trans. (1973b). The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines and Its Verse Summary. Bolinas, CA: Four Seasons Foundation, 1973.
Conze, Edward (1974). The Gilgit Manuscript of the Aṣṭādaśasāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā: Chapters 70 to 82 corresponding to the 6th, 7th, and 8th Abhisamayas. SOR 46. Rome: ISMEO, 1974.
Conze, Edward (1975). The Large Sūtra on Perfect Wisdom: With the Divisions of the Abhisamayālaṅkāra. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975.
Conze, Edward (1978). The Prajñāpāramitā Literature (Second edition). Tokyo: The Reiyukai, 1978.
Dayal, Har. The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit Literature. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1932. Reprinted Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1970.
Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans. (2019a). The Jewel Cloud (Ratnamegha, Toh 231). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2019.
Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans. (2019b). The Precious Discourse on the Blessed One’s Extensive Wisdom That Leads to Infinite Certainty (Niṣṭhāgatabhagavajjñānavaipulyasūtraratnānanta, Toh 99). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2019.
Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans. (2012). Indo-Tibetan Classical Learning and Buddhist Phenomenology. Book 6, Parts 1–2 of Jamgön Kongtrul, The Treasury of Knowledge. Boston: Snow Lion, 2012.
Falk, Harry. “The ‘Split’ Collection of Kharoṣṭhī texts.” ARIRIAB 14 (2011): 13–23.
Falk, Harry, and Seishi Karashima (2012). “A first‐century Prajñāpāramitā manuscript from Gandhāra – parivarta 1 (Texts from the Split Collection 1).” ARIRIAB 15 (2012): 19–61.
Falk, Harry, and Seishi Karashima (2013). “A first‐century Prajñāpāramitā manuscript from Gandhāra – parivarta 5 (Texts from the Split Collection 2).” ARIRIAB 16 (2013): 97–169.
Ghoṣa, Pratāpacandra, ed. Çatasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā: A Theological and Philosophical Discourse of Buddha With His Disciples in A Hundred Thousand Stanzas. Calcutta: Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1902–14. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
Goetz, Laura, trans. The Prophecy of Dīpaṅkara (Dīpaṅkaravyākaraṇa, Toh 188), 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2025.
Herrmann-Pfandt, Adelheid. Die Lhan Kar Ma: Ein früher Katalog der ins Tibetische übersetzten buddhistischen Texte, Kritische Neuausgabe mit Einleitung und Materialien. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2008.
Hinüber, O. von. “Sieben Goldblätter einer Pañca-viṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā aus Anurādhapura.” NAWG 7 (1983): 189–207.
Kimura, Takayasu, ed. Śatasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā, II/1–4, 4 vols. Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin, 2009 (II-1), 2010 (II-2, II-3), 2014 (II-4). Available as e-text (see links) on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
Kimura, Takayasu, (ed.). Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñā-pāramitā, I–VIII, 6 vols. Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin, 2007–9 (1-1, 1-2), 1986 (2-3), 1990 (4), 1992 (5), 2006 (6-8). Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
Kloetzli, Randy. Buddhist Cosmology. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1983.
Konow, Sten. The First Two Chapters of the Daśasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā: Restoration of the Sanskrit Text, Analysis and Index. Oslo: I Kommisjon Hos Jacob Dybwad, 1941.
Lamotte, Etienne (1998). Śūraṃgamasamādhisūtra: The Concentration of Heroic Progress, An Early Mahāyāna Buddhist Scripture. English translation by Sara Boin-Webb. London: Curzon Press.
Lamotte, Etienne (2001). The Treatise on the Great Virtue of Wisdom of Nāgārjuna (Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra). English translation by Gelongma Karma Migme Chodron. Unpublished electronic text, 2001.
Martin [Yerushalmi], Dan. “1,200-year-old Perfection of Wisdom Uncovered in Drepung.” Tibeto-Logic (blog). Posted July 7, 2012.
Negi, J.S., ed. Tibetan Sanskrit Dictionary (bod skad dang legs sbyar gyi tshig mdzod chen mo). 16 vols. Sarnath: Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies, 1993–2005.
Nyima, Tudeng and Gyurme Dorje, trans. An Encyclopaedic Tibetan-English Dictionary. Vol. 1. Beijing and London: Nationalities Publishing House and SOAS, 2001.
Ngawang Zangpo, trans. Jamgön Kongtrul, The Treasury of Knowledge (Books Two, Three, and Four): Buddhism’s Journey to Tibet. Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications, 2010.
Nishioka Soshū. “An Index to the Catalog Section of Bu ston’s Chronicle of Buddhism, I, II, III [in Japanese],” Tōkyō daigaku bungakubu bunka kōryū kenkyū shisetsu kenkyū kiyō 4 (1980): 61–92; 5 (1981): 43–94; 6 (1983): 47–201.
Padmakara Translation Group, trans. The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Ten Thousand Lines (Daśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā, Toh 11). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2018.
Patrul Rinpoche. Kunzang Lama’i Shelung: The Words of My Perfect Teacher. Translated by the Padmakara Translation Group. Revised second edition, 1998. London: International Sacred Literature Trust and Sage Altamira, 1994–98.
Salomon, Richard (2014). “Gāndhārī Manuscripts in the British Library, Schøyen and Other Collections.” In From Birch Bark to Digital Data: Recent Advances In Buddhist Manuscript Research, Edited by Paul Harrison and Jens-Uwe Hartmann. Vienna: Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Salomon, Richard (2018). The Buddhist Literature of Ancient Gandhāra: An Introduction with Selected Translations. Somerville, MA: Wisdom Publications.
Schaeffer, Kurtis L., and Leonard W. J. van der Kuijp. An Early Tibetan Survey of Buddhist Literature: The Bstan pa rgyas pa rgyan gyi nyi ’od of Bcom ldan ral gri. Harvard Oriental Series. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press, 2009.
van Schaik, Sam. “The Tibetan Dunhuang Manuscripts in China.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London vol. 65, no.1, 2002: 129–139.
Sparham, Gareth, trans. (2006–2012). Abhisamayālaṃkāra with vṛtti and ālokā / vṛtti by Ārya Vimuktisena; ālokā by Haribhadra. 4 vols. Fremont, CA: Jain Publishing.
Sparham, Gareth, trans. (2022a). The Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines (Aṣṭādaśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā, Toh 10). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
Sparham, Gareth, trans. (2022b). The Long Explanation of the Noble Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand, Twenty-Five Thousand, and Eighteen Thousand Lines (*Āryaśatasāhasrikāpañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāṣṭādaśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitābṛhaṭṭīkā, Toh 3808). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2022.
Stein, Lisa, and Ngawang Zangpo, trans. Butön’s History of Buddhism: In India and its Spread to Tibet, A Treasury of Priceless Scripture. Boston: Snow Lion, 2013.
Suzuki Kenta & Nagashima Jundo. “The Dunhuang Manuscript of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā.” In Buddhist Manuscripts from Central Asia: The British Library Sanskrit Fragments, vol. III/2, edited by S. Karashima, J. Nagashima & K. Wille: 593–821. Tokyo, 2015.
van der Kuijp, Leonard W. J. “Some Remarks on the Textual Transmission and Text of Bu ston Rin chen grub’s Chos ’byung, a Chronicle of Buddhism in India and Tibet.” Revue d’Etudes Tibétaines, no. 25 (April 2013): 115–93.
Zacchetti, Stefano (2005). In Praise of the Light: A Critical Synoptic Edition with an Annotated Translation of Chapters 1-3 of Dharmarakṣa’s Guang zan jing, Being the Earliest Chinese Translation of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā. Bibliotheca Philologica et Philosophica Buddhica, Vol. 8. The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology. Tokyo: Soka University.
Zacchetti, Stefano (2015). “Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras.” In Brill’s Encyclopedia of Buddhism, vol. 1, edited by Jonathan Silk. Leiden: Brill.
Zacchetti, Stefano (2021). The Da zhidu lun 大智度論 (*Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa) and the History of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā: Patterns of Textual Variation in Mahāyāna Sūtra Literature. Numata Center for Buddhist Studies: Hamburg Buddhist Studies 14, edited by Michael Radich and Jonathan Silk. Bochum / Freiburg: Projekt Verlag, 2021.