The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines
Chapter 13: Subhūti
Toh 9
Degé Kangyur, vol. 26 (shes phyin, nyi khri, ka), folios 1.b–382.a; vol. 27 (shes phyin, nyi khri, kha), folios 1.b–393.a; and vol. 28 (shes phyin, nyi khri, ga), folios 1.b–381.a
Imprint
Translated by the Padmakara Translation Group
under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha
First published 2023
Current version v 1.1.12 (2024)
Generated by 84000 Reading Room v2.25.1
84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha is a global non-profit initiative to translate all the Buddha’s words into modern languages, and to make them available to everyone.
This work is provided under the protection of a Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND (Attribution - Non-commercial - No-derivatives) 3.0 copyright. It may be copied or printed for fair use, but only with full attribution, and not for commercial advantage or personal compensation. For full details, see the Creative Commons license.
Table of Contents
Summary
The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines is among the most important scriptures underlying both the “vast” and the “profound” approaches to Buddhist thought and practice. Known as the “middle-length” version, being the second longest of the three long Perfection of Wisdom sūtras, it fills three volumes of the Kangyur. Like the two other long sūtras, it records the major teaching on the perfection of wisdom given by the Buddha Śākyamuni on Vulture Peak, detailing all aspects of the path to enlightenment while at the same time emphasizing how bodhisattvas must put them into practice without taking them—or any aspects of enlightenment itself—as having even the slightest true existence.
Acknowledgements
Translation by the Padmakara Translation Group. A complete draft by Gyurme Dorje was first edited by Charles Hastings, then revised and further edited by John Canti. The introduction was written by John Canti. We are grateful for the advice and help received from Gareth Sparham, Greg Seton, and Nathaniel Rich.
This translation is dedicated to the memory of our late colleague, long-time friend, and vajra brother Gyurme Dorje (1950–2020), who worked assiduously on this translation in his final years and into the very last months of his life. We would also like to express our gratitude to his wife, Xiaohong, for the extraordinary support she gave him on so many levels.
The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
The generous sponsorship of Kris Yao and Xiang-Jen Yao, which helped make the work on this translation possible, is most gratefully acknowledged.
Text Body
Chapter 13: Subhūti
Then the venerable Śāradvatīputra asked the venerable Subhūti, “Venerable Subhūti, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, how do they investigate these phenomena? Venerable Subhūti, what is a bodhisattva great being? What is the perfection of wisdom? What is that investigation?”
The venerable Subhūti replied to the venerable Śāradvatīputra, “Venerable Śāradvatīputra, you ask what is a bodhisattva. The term bodhisattva is employed because it designates a being (sattva) who is enlightened (bodhi). It is on the basis of their enlightenment that bodhisattvas know the aspects of all phenomena, but they are without attachment to those phenomena. [F.355.a] If you ask what are the aspects of the phenomena that they know, they know the principle of physical forms, yet they are without attachment to them. They know the aspects of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness, yet they are without attachment to them. They know the aspects of the sense fields, the sensory elements, and the links of dependent origination, yet they are without attachment to them. They know the aspects of the perfections, all the aspects of emptiness, and the thirty-seven factors conducive to enlightenment, yet they are without attachment to them. They know the aspects of the truths of the noble ones, the meditative concentrations, the immeasurable attitudes, the formless absorptions, the aspects of liberation, the serial steps of meditative absorption, emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness, the extrasensory powers, the meditative stabilities, the dhāraṇī gateways, the ten powers of the tathāgatas, the fearlessnesses, the kinds of exact knowledge, and the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas, yet they are without attachment to them.”
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra,” replied Subhūti, “the aspects, characteristics, and signs whereby phenomena are shaped, and through which conditioned and unconditioned phenomena, including sights, sounds, odors, tastes, and tangibles, or external and internal phenomena, are known—these are called the aspects of all phenomena.
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra, you also asked what is the perfection of wisdom. {Dt.257} Venerable Śāradvatīputra, the expression perfection of wisdom denotes that which is far removed.333 [F.355.b] If you ask from what it is far removed, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, it is far removed from the aggregates. This is why it is said to be far removed. It is far removed from the sense fields and the sensory elements. This is why it is said to be far removed. It is far removed from all afflicted mental states, from all sorts of opinions, and from the six classes of living beings. This is why it is said to be far removed. It is far removed from the perfection of generosity. This is why it is said to be far removed. It is far removed from the perfection of ethical discipline, the perfection of tolerance, the perfection of perseverance, the perfection of meditative concentration, and the perfection of wisdom. This is why it is said to be far removed.
“It is far removed from the emptiness of internal phenomena. This is why it is said to be far removed. It is far removed from the emptiness of external phenomena. This is why it is said to be far removed. It is far removed from the emptiness of external and internal phenomena. This is why it is said to be far removed. It is far removed from [the other aspects of emptiness], up to and including the emptiness of the essential nature of nonentities. This is why it is said to be far removed.
“It is far removed from the applications of mindfulness. This is why it is said to be far removed. It is far removed from the correct exertions, the supports for miraculous ability, the faculties, the powers, the branches of enlightenment, and the noble eightfold path. This is why it is said to be far removed. It is far removed from the truths of the noble ones, the meditative concentrations, the immeasurable attitudes, the formless absorptions, the aspects of liberation, the serial steps of meditative absorption, emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness, the extrasensory powers, [F.356.a] the meditative stabilities, and the dhāraṇī gateways, This is why it is said to be far removed. It is far removed from the powers of the tathāgatas, the fearlessnesses, the kinds of exact knowledge and the distinct qualities of the buddhas. This is why it is said to be far removed. It is far removed from [the spiritual goals], up to and including all-aspect omniscience. This is why it is said to be far removed. Those, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, are the formulations explaining how the perfection of wisdom is far removed.
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra, you also asked what constitutes investigation. Venerable Śāradvatīputra, in this context, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, they do not investigate the notion that physical forms are permanent, or the notion that they are impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that physical forms are imbued with happiness, or the notion that they are imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that physical forms constitute a self, or the notion that they constitute a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that physical forms are pleasant, or the notion that they are unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that physical forms are empty, or the notion that they are not empty. They do not investigate the notion that physical forms are with signs, or the notion that they are without signs. They do not investigate the notion that physical forms have aspirations, or that they are without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that physical forms are at peace, or the notion that they are not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that physical forms are void, or the notion that they are not void.334
“They do not investigate the notion that feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness are permanent, or the notion that they are impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that these aggregates are imbued with happiness, or the notion that they are imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that these aggregates constitute a self, or the notion that they constitute a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that these aggregates are pleasant, or the notion that they are unpleasant. [F.356.b] They do not investigate the notion that these aggregates are empty, or the notion that they are not empty. They do not investigate the notion that these aggregates are with signs, or the notion that they are without signs. They do not investigate the notion that these aggregates have aspirations, or that they are without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that these aggregates are at peace, or the notion that they are not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that these aggregates are void, or the notion that they are not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that the eyes are permanent, or the notion that they are impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that the eyes are imbued with happiness, or the notion that they are imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that the eyes constitute a self, or the notion that they constitute a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that the eyes are pleasant, or the notion that they are unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that the eyes are empty, or the notion that they are not empty. They do not investigate the notion that the eyes are with signs, or the notion that they are without signs. They do not investigate the notion that the eyes have aspirations, or that they are without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that the eyes are at peace, or the notion that they are not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that the eyes are void, or the notion that they are not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty are permanent, or the notion that they are impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that these sense organs are imbued with happiness, or the notion that they are imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that these sense organs constitute a self, or the notion that they constitute a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that these sense organs are pleasant, or the notion that they are unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that these sense organs are empty, or the notion that they are not empty. They do not investigate the notion that these sense organs are with signs, or the notion that they are without signs. They do not investigate the notion that these sense organs have aspirations, or that they are without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that these sense organs are at peace, or the notion that they are not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that these sense organs are void, or the notion that they are not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that sights are permanent, or the notion that they are impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that sights are imbued with happiness, or the notion that they are imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that sights constitute a self, or the notion that they constitute a nonself. [F.357.a] They do not investigate the notion that sights are pleasant, or the notion that they are unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that sights are empty, or the notion that they are not empty. They do not investigate the notion that sights are with signs, or the notion that they are without signs. They do not investigate the notion that sights have aspirations, or that they are without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that sights are at peace, or the notion that they are not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that sights are void, or the notion that they are not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena are permanent, or the notion that they are impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that these sense objects are imbued with happiness, or the notion that they are imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that these sense objects constitute a self, or the notion that they constitute a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that these sense objects are pleasant, or the notion that they are unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that these sense objects are empty, or the notion that they are not empty. They do not investigate the notion that these sense objects are with signs, or the notion that they are without signs. They do not investigate the notion that these sense objects have aspirations, or that they are without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that these sense objects are at peace, or the notion that they are not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that these sense objects are void or the notion that they are not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that visual consciousness is permanent, or the notion that it is impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that visual consciousness is imbued with happiness, or the notion that it is imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that visual consciousness constitutes a self, or the notion that it constitutes a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that visual consciousness is pleasant, or the notion that it is unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that visual consciousness is empty, or the notion that it is not empty. They do not investigate the notion that visual consciousness is with signs, or the notion that it is without signs. They do not investigate the notion that visual consciousness has aspirations, or that it is without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that visual consciousness is at peace, or the notion that it is not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that visual consciousness is void, or the notion that it is not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that auditory consciousness, olfactory consciousness, [F.357.b] gustatory consciousness, tactile consciousness, and mental consciousness are permanent, or the notion that they are impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of engaged consciousness are imbued with happiness, or the notion that they are imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of engaged consciousness constitute a self, or the notion that they constitute a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of engaged consciousness are pleasant, or the notion that they are unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of engaged consciousness are empty, or the notion that they are not empty. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of engaged consciousness are with signs, or the notion that they are without signs. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of engaged consciousness have aspirations, or that they are without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of engaged consciousness are at peace, or the notion that they are not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of engaged consciousness are void, or the notion that they are not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that visually compounded sensory contact is permanent, or the notion that it is impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that visually compounded sensory contact is imbued with happiness, or the notion that it is imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that visually compounded sensory contact constitutes a self, or the notion that it constitutes a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that visually compounded sensory contact is pleasant, or the notion that it is unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that visually compounded sensory contact is empty, or the notion that it is not empty. They do not investigate the notion that visually compounded sensory contact is with signs, or the notion that it is without signs. They do not investigate the notion that visually compounded sensory contact has aspirations, or that it is without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that visually compounded sensory contact is at peace, or the notion that it is not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that visually compounded sensory contact is void, or the notion that it is not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that aurally compounded sensory contact, nasally compounded sensory contact, lingually compounded sensory contact, corporeally compounded sensory contact, and mentally compounded sensory contact are permanent, or the notion that they are impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of sensory contact are imbued with happiness, or the notion that they are imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of sensory contact constitute a self, or the notion that they constitute a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of sensory contact are pleasant, or the notion that they are unpleasant. [F.358.a] They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of sensory contact are empty, or the notion that they are not empty. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of sensory contact are with signs, or the notion that they are without signs. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of sensory contact have aspirations, or that they are without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of sensory contact are at peace, or the notion that they are not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of sensory contact are void, or the notion that they are not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that feelings due to sensory contact that is visually compounded are permanent, or the notion that they are impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that feelings due to sensory contact that is visually compounded are imbued with happiness, or the notion that they are imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that feelings due to sensory contact that is visually compounded constitute a self, or the notion that they constitute a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that feelings due to sensory contact that is visually compounded are pleasant, or the notion that they are unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that feelings due to sensory contact that is visually compounded are empty, or the notion that they are not empty. They do not investigate the notion that feelings due to sensory contact that is visually compounded are with signs, or the notion that they are without signs. They do not investigate the notion that feelings due to sensory contact that is visually compounded have aspirations, or that they are without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that feelings due to sensory contact that is visually compounded are at peace, or the notion that they are not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that feelings due to sensory contact that is visually compounded are void, or the notion that they are not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that feelings due to sensory contact that is aurally compounded, feelings due to sensory contact that is nasally compounded, feelings due to sensory contact that is lingually compounded, feelings due to sensory contact that is corporeally compounded, and feelings due to sensory contact that is mentally compounded are permanent, or the notion that they are impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that these feelings are imbued with happiness, or the notion that they are imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that these feelings constitute a self, or the notion that they constitute a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that these feelings are pleasant, or the notion that they are unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that these feelings are empty, or the notion that they are not empty. They do not investigate the notion that these feelings are with signs, or the notion that they are without signs. They do not investigate the notion that these feelings have aspirations, or that they are without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that these feelings are at peace, or the notion that they are not at peace. [F.358.b] They do not investigate the notion that these feelings are void, or the notion that they are not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that the earth element is permanent, or the notion that it is impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that the earth element is imbued with happiness, or the notion that it is imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that the earth element constitutes a self, or the notion that it constitutes a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that the earth element is pleasant, or the notion that it is unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that the earth element is empty, or the notion that it is not empty. They do not investigate the notion that the earth element is with signs, or the notion that it is without signs. They do not investigate the notion that the earth element has aspirations, or that it is without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that the earth element is at peace, or the notion that it is not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that the earth element is void, or the notion that it is not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that the water element, the fire element, the wind element, the space element, and the consciousness element are permanent or the notion that they are impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that these elements are imbued with happiness, or the notion that they are imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that these elements constitute a self, or the notion that they constitute a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that these elements are pleasant, or the notion that they are unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that these elements are empty, or the notion that they are not empty. They do not investigate the notion that these elements are with signs, or the notion that they are without signs. They do not investigate the notion that these elements have aspirations, or that they are without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that these elements are at peace, or the notion that they are not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that these elements are void, or the notion that they are not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that ignorance is permanent, or the notion that it is impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that ignorance is imbued with happiness, or the notion that it is imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that ignorance constitutes a self, or the notion that it constitutes a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that ignorance is pleasant, or the notion that it is unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that ignorance is empty, or the notion that it is not empty. They do not investigate the notion that ignorance is with signs, or the notion that it is without signs. [F.359.a] They do not investigate the notion that ignorance has aspirations, or that it is without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that ignorance is at peace, or the notion that it is not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that ignorance is void, or the notion that it is not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that formative predispositions, consciousness, name and form, the six sense fields, sensory contact, sensation, craving, grasping, the rebirth process, actual birth, and aging and death are permanent, or the notion that they are impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that these links are imbued with happiness, or the notion that they are imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that these links constitute a self, or the notion that they constitute a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that these links are pleasant, or the notion that they are unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that these links are empty, or the notion that they are not empty. They do not investigate the notion that these links are with signs, or the notion that they are without signs. They do not investigate the notion that these links have aspirations, or that they are without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that these links are at peace, or the notion that they are not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that these links are void, or the notion that they are not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that the perfection of generosity is permanent, or the notion that it is impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that the perfection of generosity is imbued with happiness, or the notion that it is imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that the perfection of generosity constitutes a self, or the notion that it constitutes a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that the perfection of generosity is pleasant, or the notion that it is unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that the perfection of generosity is empty, or the notion that it is not empty. They do not investigate the notion that the perfection of generosity is with signs, or the notion that it is without signs. They do not investigate the notion that the perfection of generosity has aspirations, or that it is without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that the perfection of generosity is at peace, or the notion that it is not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that the perfection of generosity is void, or the notion that it is not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that the perfection of ethical discipline, the perfection of tolerance, the perfection of perseverance, the perfection of meditative concentration, and [F.359.b] the perfection of wisdom are permanent, or the notion that they are impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that these perfections are imbued with happiness, or the notion that they are imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that these perfections constitute a self, or the notion that they constitute a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that these perfections are pleasant, or the notion that they are unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that these perfections are empty, or the notion that they are not empty. They do not investigate the notion that these perfections are with signs, or the notion that they are without signs. They do not investigate the notion that these perfections have aspirations, or that they are without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that these perfections are at peace, or the notion that they are not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that these perfections are void, or the notion that they are not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that the emptiness of internal phenomena is permanent, or the notion that it is impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that the emptiness of internal phenomena is imbued with happiness, or the notion that it is imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that the emptiness of internal phenomena constitutes a self, or the notion that it constitutes a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that the emptiness of internal phenomena is pleasant, or the notion that it is unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that the emptiness of internal phenomena is empty, or the notion that it is not empty. They do not investigate the notion that the emptiness of internal phenomena is with signs, or the notion that it is without signs. They do not investigate the notion that the emptiness of internal phenomena has aspirations, or that it is without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that the emptiness of internal phenomena is at peace, or the notion that it is not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that the emptiness of internal phenomena is void, or the notion that it is not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that [the other aspects of emptiness], up to and including the emptiness of the essential nature of nonentities, are permanent, or the notion that they are impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of emptiness are imbued with happiness, or the notion that they are imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of emptiness constitute a self, or the notion that they constitute a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of emptiness are pleasant, or the notion that they are unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of emptiness are empty, or the notion that they are not empty. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of emptiness are with signs, or the notion that they are without signs. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of emptiness have aspirations, or that they are without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of emptiness are at peace, or the notion that they are not at peace. [F.360.a] They do not investigate the notion that these aspects of emptiness are void, or the notion that they are not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that the applications of mindfulness are permanent, or the notion that they are impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that the applications of mindfulness are imbued with happiness, or the notion that they are imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that the applications of mindfulness constitute a self, or the notion that they constitute a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that the applications of mindfulness are pleasant, or the notion that they are unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that the applications of mindfulness are empty, or the notion that they are not empty. They do not investigate the notion that the applications of mindfulness are with signs, or the notion that they are without signs. They do not investigate the notion that the applications of mindfulness have aspirations, or that they are without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that the applications of mindfulness are at peace, or the notion that they are not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that the applications of mindfulness are void, or the notion that they are not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that the correct exertions, the supports for miraculous ability, the faculties, the powers, the branches of enlightenment, and the noble eightfold path are permanent, or the notion that they are impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that these causal attributes are imbued with happiness, or the notion that they are imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that these causal attributes constitute a self, or the notion that they constitute a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that these causal attributes are pleasant, or the notion that they are unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that these causal attributes are empty, or the notion that they are not empty. They do not investigate the notion that these causal attributes are with signs, or the notion that they are without signs. They do not investigate the notion that these causal attributes have aspirations, or that they are without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that these causal attributes are at peace, or the notion that they are not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that these causal attributes are void, or the notion that they are not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that the truths of the noble ones, the meditative concentrations, the immeasurable attitudes, the formless absorptions, the aspects of liberation, [F.360.b] the serial steps of meditative absorption, emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness, the extrasensory powers, the meditative stabilities, the dhāraṇī gateways, the powers of the tathāgatas, the fearlessnesses, the kinds of exact knowledge, and the distinct qualities of the buddhas are permanent, or the notion that they are impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that these fruitional attributes are imbued with happiness, or the notion that they are imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that these fruitional attributes constitute a self, or the notion that they constitute a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that these fruitional attributes are pleasant, or the notion that they are unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that these fruitional attributes are empty, or the notion that they are not empty. They do not investigate the notion that these fruitional attributes are with signs, or the notion that they are without signs. They do not investigate the notion that these fruitional attributes have aspirations, or that they are without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that these fruitional attributes are at peace, or the notion that they are not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that these fruitional attributes are void, or the notion that they are not void.
“They do not investigate the notion that [the spiritual goals], up to and including all-aspect omniscience, are permanent, or the notion that they are impermanent. They do not investigate the notion that these spiritual goals are imbued with happiness, or the notion that they are imbued with suffering. They do not investigate the notion that these spiritual goals constitute a self, or the notion that they constitute a nonself. They do not investigate the notion that these spiritual goals are pleasant, or the notion that they are unpleasant. They do not investigate the notion that these spiritual goals are empty, or the notion that they are not empty. They do not investigate the notion that these spiritual goals are with signs, or the notion that they are without signs. They do not investigate the notion that these spiritual goals have aspirations, or that they are without aspirations. They do not investigate the notion that these spiritual goals are at peace, or the notion that they are not at peace. They do not investigate the notion that these spiritual goals are void, or the notion that they are not void. So it is, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, that when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, [F.361.a] they investigate those phenomena in that noninvestigative manner.”
The venerable Śāradvatīputra asked, “Venerable Subhūti, why do you say that the nonarising of physical forms is not physical forms, and that the nonarising of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness is not consciousness [and so forth]? Venerable Subhūti, why do you say that the nonarising of the sense fields, the sensory elements, the links of dependent origination, the perfections, all the aspects of emptiness, all the factors conducive to enlightenment, the truths of the noble ones, the meditative concentrations, the immeasurable attitudes, the formless absorptions, the aspects of liberation, the serial steps of meditative absorption, the gateways to liberation—emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness—the extrasensory powers, {Dt.258} the meditative stabilities, the dhāraṇī gateways, the powers of the tathāgatas, the fearlessnesses, the kinds of exact knowledge, the distinct qualities of the buddhas, and all-aspect omniscience is not all-aspect omniscience [and so forth]?”
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra,” replied Subhūti, “physical forms are empty of physical forms. That which is empty is not physical forms, nor does it arise. That, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, is the formulation explaining how the nonarising of physical forms is not physical forms. Venerable Śāradvatīputra, feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness are empty of consciousness [and so forth]. That which is empty is not consciousness [and so forth], nor does it arise. That, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, is the formulation explaining how [F.361.b] the nonarising of consciousness [and so forth] is not consciousness [and so forth].
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra, the sense fields, the sensory elements, and the links of dependent origination are empty of the links of dependent origination [and so forth]. That which is empty is not the links of dependent origination [and so forth], nor does it arise. That, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, is the formulation explaining how the nonarising of the links of dependent origination [and so forth] is not the links of dependent origination [and so forth].
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra, the perfection of generosity is empty of the perfection of generosity. That which is empty is not the perfection of generosity, nor does it arise. That, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, is the formulation explaining how the nonarising of the perfection of generosity is not the perfection of generosity.
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra, the perfection of ethical discipline, the perfection of tolerance, the perfection of perseverance, the perfection of meditative concentration, and the perfection of wisdom are empty of the perfection of wisdom [and so forth]. That which is empty is not the perfection of wisdom [and so forth], nor does it arise. That, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, is the formulation explaining how the nonarising of the perfection of wisdom [and so forth] is not the perfection of wisdom [and so forth].
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra, the emptiness of internal phenomena is empty of the emptiness of internal phenomena. That which is empty is not the emptiness of internal phenomena, nor does it arise. That, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, is the formulation explaining how the nonarising of the emptiness of internal phenomena is not the emptiness of internal phenomena. Venerable [F.362.a] Śāradvatīputra, the emptiness of external phenomena is empty of the emptiness of external phenomena. That which is empty is not the emptiness of external phenomena, nor does it arise. That, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, is the formulation explaining how the nonarising of the emptiness of external phenomena is not the emptiness of external phenomena. Venerable Śāradvatīputra, the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is empty of the emptiness of external and internal phenomena. That which is empty is not the emptiness of external and internal phenomena, nor does it arise. That, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, is the formulation explaining how the nonarising of the emptiness of external and internal phenomena is not the emptiness of external and internal phenomena. Venerable Śāradvatīputra, [the other aspects of emptiness], up to and including the emptiness of the essential nature of nonentities, are empty of the emptiness of the essential nature of nonentities [and so forth]. That which is empty is not the emptiness of the essential nature of nonentities [and so forth], nor does it arise. That, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, is the formulation explaining how the nonarising of the emptiness of the essential nature of nonentities [and so forth] is not the emptiness of the essential nature of nonentities [and so forth].
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra, the applications of mindfulness are empty of the applications of mindfulness. That which is empty is not the applications of mindfulness, nor does it arise. That, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, is the formulation explaining how the nonarising of the applications of mindfulness is not the applications of mindfulness. Venerable Śāradvatīputra, the correct exertions, the supports for miraculous ability, the faculties, the powers, the branches of enlightenment, and the noble eightfold path are empty of the noble eightfold path [and so forth]. That which is empty is not the noble eightfold path [and so forth], nor does it arise. That, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, is the formulation explaining how the nonarising of the noble eightfold path [and so forth] is not the noble eightfold path [and so forth]. Venerable Śāradvatīputra, the truths of the noble ones, the meditative concentrations, the immeasurable attitudes, the formless absorptions, the aspects of liberation, [F.362.b] the serial steps of meditative absorption, the gateways to liberation—emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness—the extrasensory powers, the meditative stabilities, the dhāraṇī gateways, the powers of the tathāgatas, the fearlessnesses, the kinds of exact knowledge, and the distinct qualities of the buddhas are empty of the distinct qualities of the buddhas [and so forth]. That which is empty is not the distinct qualities of the buddhas [and so forth], nor does it arise. That, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, is the formulation explaining how the nonarising of the distinct qualities of the buddhas [and so forth] is not the distinct qualities of the buddhas [and so forth]. Venerable Śāradvatīputra, [the spiritual goals], up to and including all-aspect omniscience, are empty of all-aspect omniscience [and so forth]. That which is empty is not all-aspect omniscience [and so forth], nor does it arise. That, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, is the formulation explaining how the nonarising of all-aspect omniscience [and so forth] is not all-aspect omniscience [and so forth].”
“Venerable Subhūti, why do you say that the perishing of physical forms is not physical forms; that the perishing of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness is not consciousness [and so forth]; and that the perishing of the sense fields, the sensory elements, the links of dependent origination, all the perfections, all the aspects of emptiness, the factors conducive to enlightenment, the truths of the noble ones, the meditative concentrations, the immeasurable attitudes, the formless absorptions, the aspects of liberation, the serial steps of meditative absorption, the gateways to liberation—emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness—the extrasensory powers, [F.363.a] the meditative stabilities, the dhāraṇī gateways, the powers of the tathāgatas, the fearlessnesses, the kinds of exact knowledge, and the distinct qualities of the buddhas is not the distinct qualities of the buddhas [and so forth]? Why do you say that the perishing of [the spiritual goals], up to and including all-aspect omniscience, are not all-aspect omniscience [and so forth]?”
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra,” replied Subhūti, “it is because all phenomena that are perishable, that constitute physical forms, and that are not divisible into two, and [similarly all phenomena] that are perishable, that constitute feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness, and that are not divisible into two, are neither conjoined nor disjoined, and they share a single defining characteristic in that they are all immaterial, unrevealed, unimpeded, and without defining characteristics.
“All phenomena that are perishable, that constitute the sense fields, the sensory elements, and the links of dependent origination, and that are not divisible into two, are neither conjoined nor disjoined, and they share a single defining characteristic in that they are all immaterial, unrevealed, unimpeded, and without defining characteristics.
“All phenomena that are perishable, that constitute the perfections, all the aspects of emptiness, the factors conducive to enlightenment, the truths of the noble ones, the meditative concentrations, the immeasurable attitudes, the formless absorptions, the aspects of liberation, the serial steps of meditative absorption, the gateways to liberation—emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness—the extrasensory powers, the meditative stabilities, the dhāraṇī gateways, [F.363.b] the powers of the tathāgatas, the fearlessnesses, the kinds of exact knowledge, the distinct qualities of the buddhas, and [the spiritual goals], up to and including all-aspect omniscience, and that are not divisible into two, are neither conjoined nor disjoined, and they share a single defining characteristic in that they are all immaterial, unrevealed, unimpeded, and without defining characteristics.
“Those, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, are the formulations explaining how the perishing of physical forms is not physical forms, and the perishing of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness is not consciousness [and so forth]. The perishing of the sense fields, the sensory elements, and the links of dependent origination is not the links of dependent origination [and so forth]. The perishing of the perfections, all the aspects of emptiness, the factors conducive to enlightenment, the truths of the noble ones, the meditative concentrations, the immeasurable attitudes, the formless absorptions, the aspects of liberation, the serial steps of meditative absorption, the gateways to liberation—emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness—the extrasensory powers, the meditative stabilities, the dhāraṇī gateways, the powers of the tathāgatas, the fearlessnesses, the kinds of exact knowledge, the distinct qualities of the buddhas, and [the spiritual goals], up to and including all-aspect omniscience, is not all-aspect omniscience [and so forth].”
“Subhūti, why do you say that whatever may be called physical forms, that may be counted as not two?335 [F.364.a] Why do you say that whatever may be called feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness, that may be counted as not two? Why do you say that anything said to be anything up to and including all-aspect omniscience is categorized as not two?”
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra,” replied Subhūti, “physical forms are not one distinct thing, and nonarising another. {Dt.259} The nature of nonarising is indeed physical forms. The nature of physical forms is indeed nonarising. That, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, is the formulation explaining how whatever may be called physical forms, that may be counted as not two. Similarly, feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness, too, are not one distinct thing, and nonarising another. The nature of nonarising is indeed consciousness [and so forth]. The nature of consciousness [and so forth] is indeed nonarising. That, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, is the formulation explaining how whatever may be called consciousness [and so forth], that may be counted as not two. Similarly, the sense fields, the sensory elements, the links of dependent origination, the perfections, all the aspects of emptiness, the factors conducive to enlightenment, the truths of the noble ones, the meditative concentrations, the immeasurable attitudes, the formless absorptions, the aspects of liberation, the serial steps of meditative absorption, the gateways to liberation—emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness—the extrasensory powers, the meditative stabilities, the dhāraṇī gateways, the powers of the tathāgatas, the fearlessnesses, the kinds of exact knowledge, and the distinct qualities of the buddhas are not one distinct thing, [F.364.b] and nonarising another. The nature of nonarising is indeed the distinct qualities of the buddhas [and so forth]. The nature of the distinct qualities of the buddhas [and so forth] is indeed nonarising. That, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, is the formulation explaining how whatever may be called the distinct qualities of the buddhas [and so forth], that may be counted as not two. Similarly, [the spiritual goals], up to and including all-aspect omniscience, are not one distinct thing, and nonarising another. The nature of nonarising is indeed all-aspect omniscience [and so forth]. The nature of all-aspect omniscience [and so forth] is indeed nonarising. That, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, is the formulation explaining how whatever may be called all-aspect omniscience, that may be counted as not two.”
Then the venerable Subhūti said to the Blessed One, “Blessed Lord, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom and investigate those phenomena accordingly, owing to the utter purity [of physical forms], they do observe the nonarising of physical forms. Owing to their utter purity, they do observe the nonarising of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness. Owing to their utter purity, they do observe the nonarising of the sense fields, the sensory elements, and the links of dependent origination. Owing to its utter purity, they do observe the nonarising of the perfection of generosity. Owing to their utter purity, they do observe the nonarising of the perfection of ethical discipline, the perfection of tolerance, the perfection of perseverance, the perfection of meditative concentration, and the perfection of wisdom. Owing to its utter purity, they do observe the nonarising of the emptiness of internal phenomena. [F.365.a] Owing to their utter purity, they do observe the nonarising of [the other aspects of emptiness], up to and including the emptiness of the essential nature of nonentities. Owing to their utter purity, they do observe the nonarising of the applications of mindfulness. Owing to their utter purity, they do observe the nonarising of the correct exertions, the supports for miraculous ability, the faculties, the powers, the branches of enlightenment, and the noble eightfold path. Owing to their utter purity, they do observe the truths of the noble ones, the meditative concentrations, the immeasurable attitudes, the formless absorptions, the aspects of liberation, the serial steps of meditative absorption, the gateways to liberation—emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness—the extrasensory powers, the meditative stabilities, the dhāraṇī gateways, the powers of the tathāgatas, the fearlessnesses, the kinds of exact knowledge, and the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas. Owing to their utter purity, they do observe the nonarising of [the spiritual goals], up to and including all-aspect omniscience. Owing to their utter purity, they do observe the nonarising of ordinary persons. Owing to their utter purity, they do observe the nonarising of the attributes of ordinary persons. Owing to their utter purity, they do observe the nonarising of those who have entered the stream to nirvāṇa and of the attributes of those who have entered the stream to nirvāṇa. Owing to their utter purity, they do observe the nonarising of those who are destined for only one more rebirth, of the attributes of those who are destined for only one more rebirth, of those who are no longer subject to rebirth, of the attributes of those who are no longer subject to rebirth, of the arhats, of the attributes of the arhats, of the pratyekabuddhas, of the attributes of the pratyekabuddhas, [F.365.b] of the bodhisattvas, of the attributes of the bodhisattvas, and of the buddhas. Owing to their utter purity, they do observe the nonarising of the attributes of the buddhas.”
The venerable Śāradvatīputra then addressed the venerable Subhūti as follows: “Venerable Subhūti, as I understand the meaning of your words, physical forms are indeed nonarising. Feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness are also nonarising. The sense fields are also nonarising. The sensory elements are also nonarising. The links of dependent origination are also nonarising. The perfections are also nonarising. All the aspects of emptiness are also nonarising. The thirty-seven factors of enlightenment are also nonarising. The truths of the noble ones, the meditative concentrations, the immeasurable attitudes, and the formless absorptions are also nonarising. The aspects of liberation, the serial steps of meditative absorption, the gateways to liberation—emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness—the extrasensory powers, the meditative stabilities, and the dhāraṇī gateways are also nonarising. The powers of the tathāgatas, the fearlessnesses, the kinds of exact knowledge, and the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas are also nonarising. [The spiritual goals], up to and including all-aspect omniscience, are also nonarising. Ordinary persons are also nonarising. The attributes of ordinary persons are also nonarising. Those who have entered the stream to nirvāṇa are also nonarising. The attributes of those who have entered the stream to nirvāṇa are also nonarising. Those who are destined for only one more rebirth are also nonarising. The attributes of those who are destined for only one more rebirth are also nonarising. Those who are no longer subject to rebirth are also nonarising. The attributes of those who are no longer subject to rebirth are also nonarising. The arhats are also nonarising. The attributes of the arhats are also nonarising. The pratyekabuddhas are also nonarising. [F.366.a] The attributes of the pratyekabuddhas are also nonarising. The bodhisattvas are also nonarising. The attributes of the bodhisattvas are also nonarising. The buddhas are also nonarising. The attributes of the buddhas are also nonarising. If that is so, Venerable Subhūti—if physical forms do not arise; if [all phenomena, and all the causal and fruitional attributes], up to and including the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas, also do not arise; if [the spiritual goals], up to and including all-aspect omniscience, also do not arise; if ordinary persons also do not arise; if the attributes of ordinary persons also do not arise; if those who have entered the stream to nirvāṇa and their attributes also do not arise; if those who are destined for only one more rebirth and their attributes also do not arise; if those who are no longer subject to rebirth and their attributes also do not arise; if the arhats and their attributes also do not arise; if the pratyekabuddhas and their attributes also do not arise; if the bodhisattvas and their attributes also do not arise; and if the buddhas and their attributes also do not arise—then indeed those who follow the vehicle of the śrāvakas would have already attained the fruit of entering the stream to nirvāṇa, the fruit of being destined for only one more rebirth, the fruit of no longer being subject to rebirth, and arhatship. Those who follow the vehicle of the pratyekabuddhas, too, would have already attained their individual enlightenment. Also, bodhisattva great beings would have already attained all-aspect omniscience. The five classes of living beings would not even be differentiated. Bodhisattva great beings would have already attained the five degrees of enlightenment.336
“Venerable Subhūti, if all phenomena are nonarising, why should those entering the stream to nirvāṇa {Dt.260} cultivate the path in order to abandon the three fetters?337 Why should those destined for only one more rebirth cultivate the path in order to attenuate desire, hatred, and delusion? [F.366.b] Why should those no longer subject to rebirth cultivate the path in order to abandon the five fetters associated with the lower realms? Why should arhats cultivate the path in order to abandon the five fetters associated with the higher realms? Why should followers of the vehicle of the pratyekabuddhas cultivate the path for the sake of individual enlightenment? Why should bodhisattva great beings practice austerity and undergo sufferings for the sake of beings? Why should the tathāgatas attain consummate buddhahood in unsurpassed, complete enlightenment? Why should the tathāgatas turn the wheel of the Dharma?”
The venerable Subhūti then replied to the venerable Śāradvatīputra as follows: “Venerable Śāradvatīputra, I do not hold that nonarising phenomena have attainments or comprehension. I do not hold that in nonarising there are individuals entering the stream to nirvāṇa, nor do I hold that the fruit of entering the stream to nirvāṇa is to be actualized in it. I do not hold that in nonarising there are individuals destined for only one more rebirth, nor do I hold that the fruit of being destined for only one more rebirth is to be actualized in it. I do not hold that in nonarising there are individuals no longer subject to rebirth, nor do I hold that the fruit of no longer being subject to rebirth is to be actualized in it. I do not hold that in nonarising there are arhats, nor do I hold that arhatship is to be actualized in it. I do not hold that in nonarising there are pratyekabuddhas, nor do I hold that individual enlightenment is to be actualized in it.
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra, I do not hold that bodhisattva great beings maintain the practice of austerity. Bodhisattva great beings do not engage in it with the perception of hardship. If you ask why, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, when the perception of hardship develops, [F.367.a] it will not be possible to act for the benefit of immeasurable, countless beings. On the contrary, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, by developing the perception of beings as their mother, the perception [of beings] as their father, the perception [of beings] as themselves, and the perception [of beings] as their child, they are capable of acting for the benefit of immeasurable, countless beings, without apprehending anything. Bodhisattva great beings set their minds on enlightenment in that manner. Just as the notion of individual selves is entirely nonexistent in all respects, and is nonapprehensible, in the same manner they should develop this perception with regard to all inner and outer phenomena. Having developed their perceptions in that manner, the notion of hardship338 will not arise. If you ask why, it is because they neither acquire nor do they maintain any phenomena.
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra, I do not hold that in nonarising there are tathāgatas, nor do I hold that unsurpassed, complete enlightenment is to be brought into being in it. If the tathāgatas were to turn the wheel of the Dharma, there is nothing at all that would be obtained or that should be attained on the basis of phenomena that are nonarising.”
“Venerable Subhūti, do you hold that attainment will ensue on the basis of phenomena that are arising, or else do you hold that attainment will ensue on the basis of phenomena that are nonarising?” {Dt.261}
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra,” replied Subhūti, “I do not hold that attainment will ensue on the basis of phenomena that are arising, nor do I hold that attainment will ensue on the basis of phenomena that are nonarising.”
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra, there is indeed attainment and there is clear realization, but not on the basis of either of those two. Yet, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, attainment or clear realization is designated in accordance with worldly conventions. [F.367.b] Those entering the stream to nirvāṇa, those destined for only one more rebirth, those who will no longer be reborn, arhats, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattvas, and buddhas are also designated according to worldly convention. But, ultimately, there is nothing that is designated as attainment or clear realization; or individuals entering the stream to nirvāṇa, destined for only one more rebirth, or no longer subject to rebirth; or arhats, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattvas, or buddhas.” {Dt.262}
“Venerable Subhūti, as attainment and clear realization are designated according to worldly convention, is it the case that the five classes of living beings are also differentiated owing to worldly convention but not in ultimate reality?”
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra, that is so! Just as attainment and clear realization are designated according to worldly convention, it is the case that the five classes of living beings also are differentiated owing to worldly convention but not in ultimate reality. If you ask why, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, in ultimate reality there are no past actions, no ripening of past actions, no arising, no ceasing, no affliction, and no purification.”
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra,” replied Subhūti, “I do not hold that nonarising phenomena arise, nor do I hold that arising phenomena arise.” [B26]
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra, I do not hold that nonarising physical forms, which are empty of inherent existence, arise. Venerable Śāradvatīputra, I do not hold that nonarising feelings, perceptions, [F.368.a] formative predispositions, and consciousness, which are empty of inherent existence, arise. Venerable Śāradvatīputra, I do not hold that the nonarising sense fields, sensory elements, links of dependent origination, perfections, factors conducive to enlightenment, truths of the noble ones, meditative concentrations, immeasurable attitudes, formless absorptions, aspects of liberation, serial steps of meditative absorption, gateways to liberation—emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness—extrasensory powers, meditative stabilities, dhāraṇī gateways, powers of the tathāgatas, fearlessnesses, kinds of exact knowledge, and distinct qualities of the buddhas, which are empty of inherent existence, arise. Venerable Śāradvatīputra, I do not hold that the nonarising [spiritual goals], up to and including all-aspect omniscience, which are empty of inherent existence, arise.”
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra, I do not hold that arising physical forms, which are empty of inherent existence, arise. Venerable Śāradvatīputra, I do not hold that arising feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness, which are empty of inherent existence, arise. Venerable Śāradvatīputra, I do not hold that arising sense fields, sensory elements, links of dependent origination, perfections, factors conducive to enlightenment, truths of the noble ones, meditative concentrations, immeasurable attitudes, formless absorptions, [F.368.b] aspects of liberation, serial steps of meditative absorption, gateways to liberation—emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness—extrasensory powers, meditative stabilities, dhāraṇī gateways, powers of the tathāgatas, fearlessnesses, kinds of exact knowledge, and distinct qualities of the buddhas, which are empty of inherent existence, arise. Venerable Śāradvatīputra, I do not hold that arising [spiritual goals], up to and including all-aspect omniscience, which are empty of inherent existence, arise.”
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra, arising does not arise, nor does nonarising arise. If you ask why, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, it is because both phenomena that arise and phenomena that are nonarising are neither conjoined, nor disjoined, and they share a single defining characteristic in that they are all immaterial, unrevealed, unimpeded, and without defining characteristics. Those, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, are the formulations explaining how arising does not arise, nor does nonarising arise.”
The venerable Śāradvatīputra then asked, “Venerable Subhūti, if are you inspired to say that nonarising phenomena are indeed nonarising phenomena, then, Venerable Subhūti, are you inspired also to say that there is no arising with respect to nonarising phenomena?”340
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra,” replied Subhūti, “you ask whether I am inspired to say that nonarising phenomena are indeed nonarising phenomena. In that regard, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, I am not inspired341 to say that nonarising phenomena are indeed nonarising phenomena. Nor am I inspired,342 Venerable Śāradvatīputra, to say that there is no arising with respect to nonarising phenomena. [F.369.a] If you ask why, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, it is because nonarising phenomena, the absence of arising, the act of inspired speech, the statements that are expressed, and the phenomena that do not arise are all neither conjoined, nor disjoined, and they share a single defining characteristic in that they are all immaterial, unrevealed, unimpeded, and without defining characteristics.”
“Venerable Subhūti, is it then the case that those statements are nonarising, that the act of inspired speech is also nonarising, and that those phenomena about which you were inspired to say what you said are also nonarising?”
“Venerable Śāradvatīputra, it is so! Those statements are nonarising, the act of inspired speech is nonarising, and those phenomena about which I was inspired to say what I said are also nonarising. If you ask why, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, it is because physical forms are nonarising. Feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness are nonarising. The eyes are nonarising. The ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty are nonarising. Sights are nonarising. Sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena are nonarising. Visual consciousness is nonarising. Auditory consciousness, olfactory consciousness, gustatory consciousness, tactile consciousness, and mental consciousness are nonarising. Visually compounded sensory contact is nonarising. Aurally compounded sensory contact, nasally compounded sensory contact, lingually compounded sensory contact, corporeally compounded sensory contact, and mentally compounded sensory contact are nonarising. Feelings due to sensory contact that is visually compounded are nonarising. Feelings due to sensory contact that is aurally compounded, feelings due to sensory contact that is nasally compounded, [F.369.b] feelings due to sensory contact that is lingually compounded, feelings due to sensory contact that is corporeally contacted, and feelings due to sensory contact that is mentally compounded are nonarising. The earth element is nonarising. The water element is nonarising. The fire element, the wind element, the space element, and the consciousness element are nonarising. Fundamental ignorance is nonarising. Formative predispositions, consciousness, name and form, the six sense fields, sensory contact, sensation, craving, grasping, the rebirth process, actual birth, and aging and death are nonarising. The perfection of generosity is nonarising. The perfection of ethical discipline, the perfection of tolerance, the perfection of perseverance, the perfection of meditative concentration, and the perfection of wisdom are nonarising. The emptiness of internal phenomena is nonarising. The emptiness of external phenomena is nonarising. The emptiness of external and internal phenomena is nonarising. [The other aspects of emptiness], up to and including the emptiness of the essential nature of nonentities, are nonarising. The applications of mindfulness are nonarising. The correct exertions, the supports for miraculous ability, the faculties, the powers, the branches of enlightenment, and the noble eightfold path are nonarising. The truths of the noble ones, the meditative concentrations, the immeasurable attitudes, the formless absorptions, the aspects of liberation, the