阿毘達磨俱舍論

Part 21

Previously, in the section discussing the latent defilements and envelopments, did the Blessed One speak only of the various kinds of influxes (āsrava), floods (ogha), and so forth, or are there other kinds as well?

[Because the fetters and so forth differ,

Five kinds are further taught.]

Treatise: Because the defiling fetters (saṃyojana), bonds (bandhana), latent defilements (anuśaya), secondary defilements (upakleśa), and envelopments (paryavasthāna) differ from one another, it is further taught that there are five kinds.

(Question) What are the fetters?

The stanza answers:

[The nine fetters have equal numbers of entities and equal modes of grasping;

Thus views and attachments are each established as one kind.

Because of their unwholesome nature

And their independent arising,

Among the envelopments, only envy and avarice

Are established as two kinds of fetters;

Or because these two frequently manifest,

Because they are causes of poverty and lowliness,

Because they fully reveal the secondary defilements,

And because they afflict two classes.]

Treatise: There are nine kinds of fetters: craving (anunaya), hostility (pratigha), pride (māna), ignorance (avidya), views (dṛṣṭi), attachment (parāmarśa), doubt (vicikitsā), envy (īrṣyā), and avarice (mātsarya).

The fetter of craving (anunayasaṃyojana) is attachment throughout the three realms (traidhātuka rāga). The nature of the remaining kinds is explained according to their respective cases; for example, the second, eighth, and ninth fetters occur exclusively in the Desire Realm.

The fetter of views (dṛṣṭisaṃyojana) comprises the first three kinds of views: the view of a real self, attachment to extremes, and wrong view.

The fetter of attachment (parāmarśasaṃyojana) comprises the last two kinds of views: attachment to views and attachment to rules and observances.

A question arises here: Is there a case in which a person is bound to the dharmas associated with views—that is, the feelings and so forth associated with attachment—solely by the fetter of craving and not by the fetter of views, while the latent defilement of views (dṛṣṭyanuśaya) can nevertheless increase in relation to those dharmas? There is such a case. Let us consider a person who has produced knowledge of “origination” (knowledge of origination, samudayajñāna) but has not yet produced knowledge of “cessation” (knowledge of cessation, nirodhajñāna).

At that time, this person generates the fetter of craving toward the dharmas associated with the views (dṛṣṭi) of attachment to views and attachment to rules and observances—that is, dharmas abandoned through the Truth of Cessation and the Truth of the Path. This person is then bound to these dharmas by the fetter of craving, but not by the fetter of views, because this person has abandoned the universally pervasive fetter of views (sarvatraga) that is abandoned through seeing suffering and origination, while no non-universally pervasive fetter of views then takes these dharmas as its object or is associated with them.

Nevertheless, the latent defilement of views still increases in relation to these dharmas, because if the two kinds—views and attachment, that is, the fetter of attachment—have not yet been abandoned, they continue to increase.

(Question) Why are the first three kinds of views established as one fetter—the fetter of views—while the last two are established as another—the fetter of attachment?

(Answer) Because they have equal numbers of entities (dravyas) and because both share the nature of “attachment” (parāmarśa), the last two kinds of views are separately established as one fetter.

The first three kinds of views constitute eighteen distinct entities. Wrong views in the Desire Realm are abandoned through each of the Four Truths; the last two kinds of views—comprising twelve attachments to views and six attachments to rules and observances—are likewise so.

Unlike the first three kinds of views, the last two both have attachment as their intrinsic nature. They take the first three kinds of views as their objects, whereas the first three cannot do likewise.

(Question) Why are envy and avarice established as two distinct fetters while the other envelopments are not?

(Answer) Envy and avarice are established as fetters because, among the envelopments, they are both unwholesome in nature and arise independently. Here, “independently” means that they are associated only with ignorance. The other envelopments do not possess both of these characteristics simultaneously. Some hold that this explanation is reasonable only for the masters who accept eight kinds of envelopments. For the masters who accept as many as ten kinds, it does not resolve the difficulty, because wrath (krodha) and concealment (mrakṣa) simultaneously possess both characteristics—being unwholesome and arising independently—and thus should also be classified as fetters.

Elsewhere (Madhyama, 56, 12; Majjhima, i. 432; Saṃyukta, 21, 21), the Blessed One taught that among the fetters there are five belonging to the “lower part,” that is, the lower fetters.

[There are also five fetters belonging to the lower part,

Because two prevent one from transcending the Desire Realm,

And three cause one to return to the Desire Realm.

Because the gateways and roots are included, only three are taught;

Or because unwillingness to go,

Delusion, and doubt concerning the true path

Always obstruct progress toward liberation,

Only the abandonment of three is taught.]

Treatise: These five are the view of a real self, attachment to rules and observances, doubt, sensual desire (kāmacchanda), and ill will (vyāpāda). They are called the lower fetters (avarabhāgīya) because they are connected with and conduce to the “lower part” (avarabhāga), meaning the Desire Realm (Vibhāṣā, 49, 2).

Thus, among these, two fetters prevent beings from transcending the Desire Realm, and three cause them to return to the Desire Realm.

Sensual desire and ill will obstruct escape from the Desire Realm; the view of a real self and the other two fetters cause those who have escaped from the Desire Realm to return there. They are respectively like a prison governor and prison guards.

Others hold that because of the latter three fetters, beings cannot escape from an inferior state of existence (sattvāvaratā), meaning the condition of an ordinary being (Pṛthagjana); and because of the former two fetters, they cannot escape from the lower sphere, meaning the Desire Realm. This is why these five are called the “lower” fetters.

(Question) The Blessed One taught that the fruit of stream-entry (Srotāpanna) is attained through the complete abandonment of the three fetters mentioned above (paryādāya trisaṃyojanaprahāṇāt). Yet a stream-enterer must also abandon three additional kinds of views: attachment to extremes, wrong view, and attachment to views. Therefore, in the case of an ordinary being, should the Blessed One not also have called these views fetters?

(Answer) He should indeed have done so, but the first three include both the “gateways” and the roots. There are three groups of defilements (kleśa): ⁽¹⁾ the single group (having only one mode, ekaprakāra), abandoned through seeing the Truth of Suffering, namely the view of a real self and attachment to extremes; ⁽²⁾ the double group (having two modes), abandoned through seeing the Truth of Suffering and the Truth of the Path, namely attachment to rules and observances; and ⁽³⁾ the fourfold group, abandoned through seeing the Four Truths, namely doubt, wrong view, and attachment to views.

Thus, in speaking of the first three fetters, the Blessed One intended to indicate the “gateways” to the other defilements—that is, the beginning of each group of defilements. He also intended to indicate their roots, because attachment to extremes is activated (pravartita) by the view of a real self; attachment to views is activated by attachment to rules and observances; and wrong view is activated by doubt.

One explanation holds that these three fetters are mentioned because there are three things that obstruct liberation: unwillingness to set forth, bewilderment concerning the right path, and doubt concerning the right path. Just as, in the world, these three things can prevent one from reaching another place, so too can they obstruct the Noble Path: ⁽¹⁾ personality-view gives rise to fear of liberation and makes one unwilling to attain it; ⁽²⁾ attachment to rules and observances, because it relies upon a different path of practice, causes one to become bewildered concerning the right path; and ⁽³⁾ doubt is precisely doubt concerning the right path.

The Blessed One, wishing to teach that stream-enterers have eliminated these three kinds of obstruction, therefore said that they have eliminated the three fetters.

As in the case of the five fetters “belonging to the lower part,” the Blessed One also taught five fetters “belonging to the higher part.”

[The fetters belonging to the higher part are also five:

The two kinds of craving pertaining to the Form and Formless Realms,

Restlessness, conceit, and ignorance,

Because they obstruct transcendence of the higher realms.]

Treatise: These five fetters are called “belonging to the higher part.” This means that one cannot transcend the higher realms until these fetters have been eliminated. This concludes the exposition of the fetters.

(Question) How many kinds of bonds are there?

The verse replies:

[There are three kinds of bonds because there are three feelings.]

Treatise: There are three kinds of bonds: all craving (rāga), all hatred (dveṣa), and all delusion (moha).

(Question) Why are only these three called bonds?

(Answer) Because there are three feelings. Craving increases in accordance with pleasant feeling, takes pleasant feeling as its object, and is associated with it; hatred pertains to painful feeling; delusion pertains to neutral feeling. Craving and hatred may also occur with neutral feeling, but not to the same degree as delusion. Alternatively, the statement “there are three bonds because there are three feelings” refers to the feelings within an individual continuum.

(Question) The bonds have been explained; what, then, are the latent tendencies?

The verse replies:

[The latent tendencies have already been explained above.]

Treatise: [There are six, seven, ten, or ninety-eight latent tendencies, as explained above.]

(Question) What are the secondary afflictions?

The verse replies:

[Apart from these, the secondary afflictions

Are the defiled mental factors belonging to the skandha of formations.]

Treatise: The afflictions are also called secondary afflictions (upakleśa) because they defile the mind (cittopakleśanāt = cittakleśakaraṇāt).

Apart from the afflictions, the defiled mental factors belonging to the skandha of formations (saṃskāraskandha) are also called secondary afflictions; that is, these mental factors are found in proximity to the afflictions, or the afflictions are found in proximity to them. They are not afflictions because they are not roots; and they are mentioned in the Kṣudravastuka scripture.

Next comes an explanation of the relationship between the afflictions, the envelopment afflictions, and the stains of affliction (kleśamalas).

[The eight envelopment afflictions are shamelessness and lack of moral dread,

Envy, avarice, regret, torpor,

Restlessness, and lethargy;

Or there are ten if anger and concealment are added.

Shamelessness, avarice, and restlessness

All arise from craving;

Lack of moral dread, torpor, and lethargy

Arise from ignorance;

Envy and anger arise from hatred;

Regret from doubt, and concealment from contention.]

Treatise: The afflictions are also called envelopment afflictions, as a sutra says: “One experiences suffering arising from an envelopment affliction; this envelopment affliction is craving itself.”

The Prakaraṇapāda teaches that there are eight envelopment afflictions; the Vibhāṣā, however, speaks of ten, adding anger (krodha) and concealment (mrakṣa): ⁽¹⁾–⁽²⁾ shamelessness (āhrīkya) and lack of moral dread (anapatrāpya), as explained previously; ⁽³⁾ envy (īrṣyā) is mental jealousy at the prosperity of others; ⁽⁴⁾ avarice (mātsarya) is mental stinginess opposed to giving the Dharma (dharma) and material things (āmiṣa); ⁽⁵⁾ restlessness (auddhatya), as explained previously; ⁽⁶⁾ regret (kaukṛtya) is of two kinds, wholesome and unwholesome, but only the defiled kind is called an envelopment affliction; ⁽⁷⁾ lethargy (styāna), as explained previously;

⁽⁸⁾ torpor (middha) is the feebleness and suppression (abhisaṃkṣepa) of the mind that renders it incapable of sustaining the body (kāyasaṃdhāraṇa); torpor is of three kinds—wholesome, defiled, and neutral—but only the defiled kind is called an envelopment affliction; ⁽⁹⁾ anger is mental fury directed toward sentient beings (sattva) as well as insentient things (asattva), but it is not the same as ill will (vyāpāda) or harmfulness (vihiṃsā); ⁽¹⁰⁾ concealment is the hiding of one’s own faults.

(Question) What are the sources of the envelopment afflictions?

(Answer) Shamelessness (āhrīkya), restlessness (auddhatya), and avarice (mātsarya) arise from craving (rāga); lethargy (styāna), torpor (middha), and lack of moral dread (anapatrāpya) arise from ignorance (avidyā); regret (kautṛtya) arises from doubt (vicikitsā); envy (īrṣyā) and anger (krodha) arise from hatred (pratigha). Here, “arise from” means “flow from” (niṣyanda, homogeneous outflow). There are divergent opinions concerning concealment (mrakṣa). Some hold that concealment arises from craving (tṛṣṇā); others hold that it arises from ignorance; still others hold that it may arise from either craving or ignorance, according to whether there is clear comprehension or no clear comprehension.

Thus, the ten secondary afflictions described above are homogeneous outflows of the afflictions.

[The stains of affliction exude from the afflictions, just as impurities exude from the body.] What, then, are the stains of affliction?

[The six stains of affliction are obstinacy,

Harmfulness, resentment, deceit, hypocrisy, and intoxication.

Hypocrisy and intoxication arise from craving;

Harmfulness and resentment arise from hatred;

Obstinacy arises from attachment to views;

Deceit arises from the views.]

Treatise: Hypocrisy (māya) deceives others (paravañcanā); deceit (śāṭhya) is the mind’s lack of straightforwardness, which causes one not to speak truthfully, not to refute what should be refuted, or to explain things ambiguously; intoxication (mada) is as explained previously; obstinacy (pradāśa) is the stubborn clinging to wrongdoing (sāvadyavastuparāmarśa, attachment to culpable matters), which causes one to refuse to heed admonition; resentment (upanāha) is the bearing of a grudge; harmfulness (vihiṃsā) is hostility expressed through deeds and words that harm others.

Hypocrisy and intoxication arise from craving; resentment and harmfulness arise from hatred; obstinacy arises from attachment to views (dṛṣṭiparāmarśa); deceit arises from views.

Deceit is a homogeneous outflow of views (dṛṣṭi), because a verse says: “What is crookedness (kauṭilya)?—It is wrong view.”

The envelopment afflictions and stains arise from the afflictions; therefore, they are called secondary afflictions.

(Question) How are the secondary afflictions eliminated?

The verse replies:

[The envelopment afflictions of shamelessness, lack of moral dread, torpor,

Lethargy, and restlessness are eliminated by seeing and cultivation;

The remaining envelopment afflictions and the stains of affliction,

Being independent, are eliminated only by cultivation.]

Treatise: Among the ten envelopment afflictions mentioned above, the first five—beginning with shamelessness (āhrikya)—because they are associated with two afflictions, are eliminated by the Path of Seeing and the Path of Cultivation. They are eliminated by the Path of Seeing when the affliction with which they are associated is itself subject to elimination by seeing. The remainder—envy and so forth—are eliminated only by the Path of Cultivation because they are “independent” (svatantra) and are associated only with ignorance. The stains of affliction are eliminated in the same way.

(Question) Are all subsidiary afflictions by nature unwholesome?

The stanza answers:

[Three subsidiary afflictions in the Desire Realm

Are of two natures; the rest are unwholesome;

The subsidiary afflictions in the higher realms are all indeterminate.]

Commentary: Torpor, restlessness, and sleep are either unwholesome or indeterminate in nature. Above the Desire Realm, wherever subsidiary afflictions exist, they are only of the indeterminate (avyākṛta) kind.

(Question) How many subsidiary afflictions exist in the different realms?

The stanza answers:

[Deceit and dishonesty exist in the Desire Realm and the first concentration;

Three kinds exist in all three realms; the rest belong to the Desire Realm.]

Commentary: Deceit and dishonesty exist only in two realms: the Desire Realm and the Form Realm. There can be no doubt about this, because the Great Brahmā (Mahābrahman), intending to deceive the bhikshu Venerable Aśvajit (Āyuṣman Aśvajit), gave an inaccurate definition. This was discussed previously, but because it concerns subsidiary afflictions, it is mentioned again here. The three kinds—torpor, restlessness, and conceit—exist in all three realms. Of the sixteen subsidiary afflictions—the ten envelopment afflictions and the six defilements—eleven exist only in the Desire Realm; that is, after excluding deceit, dishonesty, torpor, restlessness, and conceit.

(Question) Among the afflictions and subsidiary afflictions, how many belong only to the sphere of the mental faculty (manas), and how many belong to the sphere of the six consciousnesses (ṣaḍvijñānabhūmika)?

The stanza answers:

[Those abandoned through seeing, conceit, sleep,

And the autonomous subsidiary afflictions

All arise from the mental sphere;

The rest depend upon the six consciousnesses.]

Commentary: The afflictions and subsidiary afflictions abandoned through seeing depend only upon mental consciousness (manovijñāna). Conceit and sleep, which are abandoned through cultivation, also have mental consciousness as their basis, because both belong to the mental sphere in all three realms. The “autonomous” subsidiary afflictions abandoned through cultivation are likewise.

The other afflictions and subsidiary afflictions all depend upon the six consciousnesses. These are craving abandoned through cultivation, hatred, and ignorance; the subsidiary afflictions associated with them are shamelessness, lack of moral dread, torpor, restlessness, and the afflictions belonging to the category of universal afflictive mental factors.

(Question) With which faculties of feeling are the afflictions and subsidiary afflictions associated (saṃprayukta)?

(Answer) First, the afflictions of the Desire Realm should be enumerated:

[Among the afflictions of the Desire Realm,

Craving is associated with joy and pleasure;

Hatred is associated with dejection and pain;

Delusion is associated with all;

Wrong view is associated with dejection and joy;

Doubt is associated with dejection; the remaining five afflictions are associated with joy.

All are associated with equanimity.

In the higher spheres they are associated

With the feelings appropriate to their respective kinds of consciousness.]

Commentary: Craving is associated with the faculty of pleasure (sukhendriya) and the faculty of joy (saumanasyendriya); hatred (pratigha = dveṣa) is associated with the faculty of pain (duḥkhendriya) and the faculty of dejection (daurmanasyendriya), because craving and hatred respectively take the form of gladness or distress (harṣa, dainyākāravartin), and because both belong to the six consciousnesses.

Ignorance is associated with all five feelings because it is associated with all the afflictions.

Wrong view is associated with dejection in the case of one who has performed wholesome karma but is distressed because these actions do not produce a result; in the case of one who performs unwholesome karma, it is associated with joy.

Doubt is associated with dejection because, when one is in doubt, one desires to know with exact certainty—that is, one seeks definitive knowledge.

The other afflictions—that is, all views other than wrong view, together with conceit—are associated with joy because they take the form of gladness.

(Question) Which latent afflictions have been discussed thus far?

(Answer) They are the latent afflictions of the Desire Realm. After explaining the distinctions among these latent afflictions, the author of the treatise states a characteristic common to them all: all these latent afflictions are associated with the faculty of equanimity (upekṣendriya), because when the continuum of the afflictions becomes exhausted, equanimity necessarily remains (upekṣā saṃtiṣṭhate).

(Question) What of the afflictions in the higher spheres?

(Answer) They are associated with the kinds of feeling appropriate to them whenever such feelings are present.

In the first concentration—where there are four kinds of consciousness (vijñāna): eye, ear, body, and mental consciousness—the latent afflictions arising together with each of these consciousnesses are associated with the kind of feeling appropriate to that consciousness. Thus there are: ⁽¹⁾ the feeling of pleasure associated with eye consciousness, ear consciousness, and body consciousness; ⁽²⁾ the feeling of joy associated with mental consciousness; and ⁽³⁾ the feeling of equanimity associated with all four consciousnesses.

In the second concentration and so forth—where there is only mental consciousness—the latent afflictions arising together with this consciousness are associated with the feelings appropriate to that consciousness in their respective concentration. Thus, in the second concentration there are joy and equanimity; in the third concentration, pleasure and equanimity; and in the fourth concentration and the spheres of the Formless Realm, there is only equanimity.

Concerning the subsidiary afflictions:

[Among the subsidiary afflictions,

Envy, regret, anger, vexation,

Harmfulness, and resentment all arise together with dejection;

Avarice is associated with the feeling of joy;

Deceit, dishonesty, sleep, and concealment

Arise together with dejection and joy;

Conceit is associated with joy and pleasure;

All are associated with equanimity;

The remaining four are associated with all feelings.]

Commentary: The six subsidiary afflictions—envy, regret, anger, vexation, harmfulness, and resentment—are all associated with dejection because they all take the form of distress and belong to the mental sphere.

Avarice is associated with joy and takes the form of gladness because avarice derives from craving (lobhānvayatvena).

Deceit, dishonesty, sleep, and concealment are associated with joy when one deceives others with a glad mind, but if one deceives with a distressed mind, they are associated with dejection.

Conceit is associated with joy and pleasure. In the third concentration, conceit is associated with the feeling of pleasure; in the lower spheres it is associated with joy; and in the higher spheres it is associated with equanimity.

Thus, all are associated with equanimity, just as all afflictions and subsidiary afflictions are associated with ignorance, without exception.

The four envelopment afflictions—shamelessness, lack of moral dread, torpor, and restlessness—are associated with the five feelings because the first two belong to the category of universal unwholesome mental factors (akuśalamahābhūmika), while the latter two belong to the category of universal afflictive mental factors (kleśamahābhūmika).

When analyzed from another perspective, the sutras (Saṃyukta, 26, 28; Ekottara, 24, 2) declare that among the afflictions and subsidiary afflictions discussed above there are five hindrances (nīravaṇas):

[The hindrances exist only in the Desire Realm

Because they have the same nutriment, antidote, and function.

Although two kinds constitute a single hindrance,

There are only five hindrances because they obstruct the skandhas.]

Commentary: The five hindrances are sensual desire (kāmacchanda), ill will (vyāpāda), torpor and sleep (styānamiddha), restlessness and regret (auddhatyakaukṛtya), and doubt (vicikitsā).

(Question) Do the three kinds—torpor, restlessness, and doubt—mentioned here exist only in the Desire Realm, or in all three realms?

(Answer) The sutra (Saṃyutta, v. 145) states that all the hindrances are unwholesome in nature; therefore, they exist only in the Desire Realm.

(Question) Why are torpor and sleep, as well as restlessness and regret, each established together as a single hindrance?

(Answer) Each pair is established as one hindrance because its members have the same nutriment, antidote, and function.

Here, the term “antidote” (vipakṣa) is intended to mean the “opposite” (pratipakṣa), namely, that which counteracts the nutriment.

The sutra teaches that sloth and torpor have the same kind of nutriment and the same kind of non-nutriment (anāhāra).

(Question) What is the nutriment of sloth and torpor?

(Answer) It consists of five dharmas: languor (tandrī), discontent (arati), yawning and stretching (vijṛmbhikā), immoderation in eating (bhakte śamatā), and mental lassitude (cetaso līnatva).

(Question) What is the non-nutriment of sloth and torpor?

(Answer) It is the perception of light (ālokasaṃjñā).

Sloth and torpor also share the same function (kṛtya kriyā), namely, making the mind sluggish (līna).

Just as with sloth and torpor, restlessness and remorse also have the same kind of nutriment, the same kind of non-nutriment, and the same function. Their nutriment consists of four dharmas: thoughts concerning relatives (jñātivitarka), thoughts concerning countries (janapadavitarka), thoughts concerning immortality (amaravitarka), and recollection of pleasurable associations and activities performed in the past (pūrva ... saṃsargacaryānusmṛti). Their non-nutriment is tranquility (śamatha), and their function is to prevent the mind from becoming tranquil.

(Question) All afflictions are hindrances (nivaraṇa); why does the sutra mention only the five above?

(Answer) Because they impair the skandhas and because of doubt. Sensual desire (kāmacchanda) and ill will (vyāpāda) impair the skandha of morality (śīlaskandha); sloth and torpor impair the skandha of wisdom (prajñāskandha); restlessness and remorse impair the skandha of concentration (samādhiskandha). Because wisdom and concentration are absent, doubt concerning the Four Noble Truths arises.

(Question) If the explanation above is correct, then among the hindrances, restlessness and remorse, which obstruct concentration, should have been mentioned before sloth and torpor. And if that order were followed, these two hindrances would respectively impair the skandhas of concentration and wisdom, because it is sloth and torpor that harm those who cultivate concentration (prayukta), whereas it is restlessness and remorse that harm those who cultivate wisdom (dharmapravicaya, investigation of dharmas = prajñā).

Other masters offer a different explanation.

(Question) How do they explain it?

(Answer) While traveling (varāgata, the stage of going), a practitioner perceives an agreeable or disagreeable object and recognizes it as agreeable or disagreeable. But when this person comes to rest (vihāragata), sensual desire and ill will, which arise from that agreeable or disagreeable impression, first obstruct the person's entry into concentration. After concentration has been entered, because the practitioner is unable to cultivate tranquility and insight, sloth and torpor and then restlessness and remorse arise, obstructing concentration (samādhi = śamatha) and wisdom (prajñā = vipaśyanā) respectively.

Finally, upon emerging from concentration, when examining the dharmas (dharmanidhyānakāta), doubt (vicikitsā) again creates an obstruction. Therefore, only five hindrances are established.

Here there is a matter requiring consideration. Let us examine the universally operative afflictions belonging to a different sphere or plane (visabhāgadhātusarvatraga)—that is, the afflictions comprising the group of wrong views (mithyādṛṣṭi), and so forth, which are abandoned through the insight into suffering and its origin and which take the two higher spheres as their objects. These objects are completely known (prajñāyate, comprehensively known) through the subsequent knowledges of suffering and its origin (anvayajñānas), whose objects are the higher spheres and planes.

Nevertheless, the aforementioned afflictions are not abandoned when these two kinds of knowledge arise, because, since these afflictions also take the Realm of Desire as their object (kāmāvacaratvāt), they have already been abandoned by the Dharma knowledges of suffering and its origin, which arise before the subsequent knowledges (anvayajñānas).

Conversely, concerning the afflictions that take contaminated phenomena as their objects (sāsravālambana) and are abandoned through the insight into cessation and the path—that is, the afflictions belonging to the group of attachment to views (dṛṣṭiparāmarśa)—they are not abandoned when their objects [namely, the group of wrong views abandoned through the insight into cessation and the path] are comprehensively known [through the subsequent knowledges of suffering and its origin or the Dharma knowledges of suffering and its origin]. Rather, they are abandoned only later through the insight into cessation and the insight into the path.

(Question) How, then, can it be said that these two groups of afflictions are abandoned through knowledge of their objects (ālambanaparijñānāt, comprehensive knowledge of the object)?

(Answer) Not all afflictions are abandoned solely through knowledge of their objects; they may be abandoned in four ways:

[Through comprehensive knowledge of the object,

Through abandonment of that which apprehends, abandonment of the object, and the arising of an antidote.]

Commentary: The afflictions abandoned through insight are abandoned by: ⁽¹⁾ Comprehensive knowledge of the object. This is the case with (a) the afflictions that take as their objects the sphere or plane to which they belong (svabhūmyālambana), which are abandoned through the insight into suffering and its origin; and (b) the afflictions that take uncontaminated phenomena as their objects, which are abandoned through the insight into cessation and the path.

⁽²⁾ The abandonment of the afflictions that take as their objects the above-mentioned afflictions abandoned through insight (afflictions abandoned through insight). The former are precisely the universally operative afflictions of a different sphere or plane (visabhāgadhātusarvatraga) that are abandoned through the insight into suffering and its origin. The “afflictions abandoned through insight” are the objects of the universally operative afflictions in their own sphere or plane (sabhāgadhātu, their own sphere). This means that because the former afflictions are abandoned, the latter afflictions are thereby abandoned.

⁽³⁾ The abandonment of the objects of the “afflictions abandoned through insight”; that is, the afflictions that have contaminated objects and are abandoned through the insight into cessation and the path. These afflictions take as their objects the afflictions that have uncontaminated objects; and when those afflictions with uncontaminated objects are abandoned, these afflictions are also abandoned.

The afflictions abandoned through cultivation are abandoned through the arising of an antidote (pratipakṣodayātkṣayaḥ). When the Noble Path opposed to a particular group of afflictions arises, it brings about the abandonment of that group.

(Question) Which Noble Path counteracts which group of afflictions?

(Answer) This will be explained in detail: “The Noble Path of the weakest grade counteracts the afflictions of the strongest grade ... the Noble Path of the strongest grade counteracts the afflictions of the weakest grade.”

(Question) How many kinds of antidote are there?

The verse answers:

[There are four kinds of antidote:

Abandoning, sustaining, distancing, and disenchantment.]

Commentary: There are four kinds of antidote: ⁽¹⁾ The abandoning antidote (prahāṇapratipakṣa), which is the uninterrupted path (ānantaryamārga); ⁽²⁾ the sustaining antidote (adhārapratipakṣa), which is the Noble Path (vimuktimārga) immediately following the preceding path and which has the function of sustaining the abandonment attained by that preceding path; ⁽³⁾ the distancing antidote (dirībhāvapraptipakṣa), which is the Noble Path immediately following the path of liberation and which has the function of distancing one from the acquisition (prāpti) of the afflictions previously abandoned (the acquisition of the afflictions to be abandoned).

Some masters hold that the path of liberation also belongs to the distancing antidote because it likewise has the function of distancing one from the acquisition of the afflictions; ⁽⁴⁾ the disenchantment antidote (vidūṣaṇāpraptipakṣa), which is the Noble Path that causes one to become disenchanted (vidūṣayati) with a particular sphere (dhātu) by regarding it as having numerous defects (doṣato darśanam), such as impermanence and so forth.

The most accurate sequence of the foregoing antidotes, however, is as follows: ⁽¹⁾ the disenchantment antidote, namely, the path of preparation (prayogamārga); ⁽²⁾ the abandoning antidote, namely, all the uninterrupted paths; ⁽³⁾ the sustaining antidote, namely, the path of liberation; and ⁽⁴⁾ the distancing antidote, namely, the path of special advancement (viśeṣamārga).

(Question) Through separation from what are the afflictions eliminated?

The stanza answers:

[It should be known that it is from their objects

That the afflictions are eliminated.]

Exposition: The afflictions cannot be separated from their associated dharmas (saṃprayoga) [that is, mental factors associated with the mind, such as feeling and so forth]. They can only be separated from their objects, so that they can no longer arise when those objects serve as conditions.

(Question) Future afflictions may be separated from their objects, but how can this be so for past afflictions? [For the things that these afflictions took as their objects still continue to be apprehended as objects.]

(Answer) Do you suppose that the expression “to be eliminated through separation from the object” (ālambanātprahātavyaḥ) means “to be eliminated through the complete knowledge of the object” (ālambanaparijñānāt prahātavyaḥ, eliminated because the object is comprehensively known)? If understood in this way, it would be unreasonable, because it would not apply universally. Therefore, the question to be resolved here is: Why are the afflictions said to be “eliminated” (prahīṇa)?

An affliction belonging to one’s own continuum (svāsaṃtānika) is eliminated through the elimination of the acquisition (prāpti) of that affliction. As for the afflictions in the continuums of others (parasaṃtānakleśa), material dharmas (rūpa) belonging to their classes [such as wholesome (kuśala) dharmas and so forth], and undefiled dharmas, all are said to be eliminated through the elimination of the afflictions in one’s own continuum that take those dharmas as their objects. (Vibhāṣā, 53, 7; 79, 18).

(Question) How many kinds of “remoteness” (dūratā) are there?

The stanza answers:

[Remoteness is of four kinds:

Characteristic, antidote, place, and time;

Like the great elements, śīla,

Different regions, and different times.]

Exposition: According to tradition (Vibhāṣā, 17, 2; Prakaraṇa, 6, 11), there are four kinds of remoteness.

⁽¹⁾ Remoteness of characteristic is remoteness due to a difference in characteristics (vailakṣaṇya). Although the great elements (mahābhūta) arise together [within a single aggregate], they remain remote from one another because their essential natures differ.

⁽²⁾ Remoteness of antidote is remoteness due to mutual opposition (vipakṣtva = pratipakṣatva); for example, misconduct (dauḥśīlya) is remote from moral discipline (śīla).

⁽³⁾ Remoteness of place (deśaviccheda) is spatial separation, like the distance between the eastern sea and the western sea.

⁽⁴⁾ Remoteness of time is temporal separation, as between the past and the future.

(Question) The past and the future are both remote; but from what are they remote?

(Answer) They are remote from the present.

(Question) The past that has only just ceased and the future that is about to arise—how can they be said to be remote from the present?

(Answer) According to us, it is precisely because they differ in time (adhavanānātra) that the past and future are called remote, not because they lie far in the past or far in the future (nacirabhūtabhāvitvena).

(Question) If so, the present should also be called remote, because it likewise constitutes a distinct time.

(Answer) We maintain that the past and future are remote with respect to activity (kāritra).

(Question) Since unconditioned dharmas have no activity, how can they be called near (antike)?

(Answer) Because the two kinds of cessation (nirodha) can be acquired everywhere.

(Question) If so, this explanation also applies to the past and future. [For past and future wholesome dharmas and so forth can still be acquired.] And how can space (ākāśa), which cannot be acquired, be called near?

(Answer) We say that the past and future are remote from each other because the present separates them, while the present is called near because it is near both the past and the future. Unconditioned dharmas are called near because they are neither separated nor obstructed by anything whatsoever.

(The author of the treatise) If so, the past and future could simultaneously be both remote and near: remote because they are separated from each other, and near because they are near the present.

The following is the most reasonable explanation: The future is remote from the intrinsic characteristic of dharmas (dharmasvalakṣaṇāt) because it has not yet attained this intrinsic characteristic; the past is remote from the intrinsic characteristic of dharmas because it has fallen away (pracyuta) from this intrinsic characteristic.

(Question) It was stated above that afflictions are eliminated through the arising of an antidote. Does this mean that the afflictions undergo a “further elimination” (viśeṣaprahāṇa) by means of the path of advancement?

The stanza answers:

[Afflictions are not eliminated a second time;

Separation may be acquired many times,

At the six occasions of the arising of the antidote, attainment of fruits,

And cultivation of the faculties.]

Exposition: Each affliction is eliminated only once, by the Noble Path called the “path of elimination” (prahāṇamārga) specific to that affliction. The acquisition of separation from these afflictions, however, occurs many times.

(Question) On how many occasions is separation acquired?

(Answer) On six occasions: when the antidotal path arises, when a fruit is attained, and when the faculties are cultivated.

Here, “antidotal path” refers to the path of liberation (vimuktimārga); “fruit” refers to the four fruits of the noble ones, beginning with the Stream-enterer (Srotāpanna); and “cultivation of the faculties” means the transformation of the faculties (indriyasaṃcāra).

On these six occasions, separation from the afflictions is acquired. In some cases, all six occasions are required for separation from the afflictions to be acquired, while in other cases only two occasions are required. Separation (visaṃyoga) is, in certain cases, also called comprehensive knowledge (parijñā). (Vibhāṣā, 79, 1). Two kinds of comprehensive knowledge are distinguished: comprehensive knowledge as cognition (jñānaparijñā), namely undefiled cognition; and comprehensive knowledge as elimination (prahāṇaparijñā), namely elimination, because in this case the result is named after its cause.

(Question) Does every elimination constitute a comprehensive knowledge?

The stanza answers:

[There are nine comprehensive knowledges as elimination:

The elimination of the first two kinds [of affliction] in the Desire Realm is one comprehensive knowledge;

Each of the remaining two kinds is one comprehensive knowledge, making three in all;

The higher realms likewise have three comprehensive knowledges.

The other three comprehensive knowledges are the elimination of the five lower fetters,

And all [the fetters] of the Form Realm.]

Exposition: There are nine comprehensive knowledges in all.

First, the elimination of the first two kinds in the Desire Realm constitutes one comprehensive knowledge. These are the first two kinds of affliction in the Desire Realm: the afflictions eliminated by seeing suffering and those eliminated by seeing its origin.

The elimination of the afflictions in the Desire Realm that are eliminated by seeing cessation constitutes one comprehensive knowledge; the same is true of the elimination of the afflictions in the Desire Realm that are eliminated by seeing the path.

Just as the elimination of the afflictions in the Desire Realm that are eliminated by seeing constitutes three comprehensive knowledges, so too, in the two higher realms, the elimination of the afflictions eliminated by seeing suffering and its origin constitutes one comprehensive knowledge; the elimination of the afflictions eliminated by seeing cessation constitutes the second comprehensive knowledge; and the elimination of the afflictions eliminated by seeing the path constitutes the third.

Thus, the six comprehensive knowledges pertaining to the elimination of afflictions encompass the three realms, and all concern what is to be eliminated by seeing the truths (satyadarśanageya).

In addition, there are three other comprehensive knowledges:

The abandonment of the fetters belonging to the lower part (avarabhāgīyas), that is, the defilements (āsravas) of the Desire Realm, constitutes one complete knowledge.

The abandonment of the fetters of the Form Realm—also called complete knowledge through the exhaustion of attachment to form (rūparāgakṣayaparijñā)—constitutes one complete knowledge.

The third complete knowledge is the abandonment of all the fetters and is also called “complete knowledge through the complete exhaustion of all fetters” (sarvasaṃyojanaparyādānaparijñā).

These three kinds of complete knowledge are all abandonments of defilements to be abandoned by the Path of Cultivation (bhāvanāheya).

With regard to the abandonment of defilements to be abandoned by cultivation, a distinction is made between the cases pertaining to the Form Realm and the Formless Realm; but no such distinction is made for the abandonment of defilements to be abandoned by seeing, because they have the same paths of counteraction.

(Question) Of these nine kinds of complete knowledge, how many are fruits of the paths?

The stanza answers:

[Of these, six are fruits of the tolerances;

The remaining three are fruits of knowledge;

All are fruits of the Preliminary Concentration;

Five or eight are fruits of the fundamental concentrations;

One is the fruit of the threshold of the Formless Realm;

The three fundamental concentrations are likewise;

Two are fruits of the mundane path;

Nine are fruits of the Noble Path;

Three are fruits of Dharma-knowledge; two are fruits of subsequent knowledge;

Six are fruits of the class of Dharma-knowledge;

Five are fruits of the class of subsequent knowledge.]

Treatise: The first six complete knowledges, namely, the abandonments of the defilements pertaining to seeing the truths, are all fruits of the tolerances (kṣāntis).

The three kinds of complete knowledge beginning with the abandonment of the fetters belonging to the lower part are attained through the Path of Cultivation (bhāvanāmārga), and therefore they are all fruits of knowledge (jñāna).

(Question) How can complete knowledge be the fruit of tolerance (Vibhāṣā, 62, 9)?

(Answer) Because the tolerances belong to the retinue of knowledge, just as members of a king’s retinue may provisionally bear the king’s name; or because tolerance and knowledge share the same fruit.

(Question) At which level of concentration are the complete knowledges attained?

(Answer) All are fruits of the Preliminary Concentration (anāgamya); five or eight complete knowledges are fruits of the fundamental concentrations (mauladhyānas).

According to the Vaibhāṣikas, five complete knowledges are fruits of the fundamental concentrations—namely, those complete knowledges comprising the abandonment of the defilements of the Form Realm and the Formless Realm. The abandonment of the defilements of the Desire Realm is only the fruit of the Preliminary Concentration, that is, of the concentration preparatory to the first concentration.

According to the Venerable Ghoṣaka (Bhadanta Ghoṣaka), eight complete knowledges are fruits of the fundamental concentrations. If a person has become detached from the Desire Realm through the mundane path, or contaminated path (sāsrava, laukikamārga), and enters the seeing of the truths (satyadarśana), or Path of Seeing (darśanamārga; uncontaminated path), by relying upon the meditative concentrations, then that person’s abandonment of the defilements of the Desire Realm pertaining to the Path of Seeing—that is, the person’s acquisition of disconnection from those defilements—must be regarded as a fruit of the Path of Seeing because this acquisition is uncontaminated.

Only the complete knowledge concerning the fetters belonging to the lower part is a fruit of the Preliminary Concentration.

The intermediate concentration (dhyānāntara) is the same as the fundamental concentrations in this respect.

Complete knowledge through the exhaustion of attachment to form is the fruit of the threshold stage (sāmantaka) of the Sphere of Infinite Space (ākāśānantyāyatana). [To enter the first formless attainment, one must become detached from the defilements of the Form Realm; and this is precisely what is accomplished at this threshold stage.]

Complete knowledge through the everlasting exhaustion of all fetters is the fruit of the three fundamental formless attainments.

All nine kinds of complete knowledge are attained through the uncontaminated Noble Path; however, the seventh and eighth complete knowledges may also be attained through the contaminated path.

The last two kinds of complete knowledge are fruits of subsequent knowledge (anvayajñāna), that is, the knowledge taking as its object suffering and so forth in the two higher realms, which is included in the Path of Cultivation.

The last three kinds of complete knowledge are fruits of Dharma-knowledge (dharmajñāna), that is, the knowledge taking as its object suffering and so forth in the Desire Realm, which is included in the Path of Cultivation, because this knowledge counteracts the defilements to be abandoned by cultivation (bhāvanāheya) in all three realms.

Six complete knowledges are fruits of the “Dharma-knowledge” class, namely, the complete knowledges that are fruits of the Dharma-tolerances (dharmakṣānti) and Dharma-knowledges (dharmajñānas).

Five complete knowledges are fruits of the “subsequent-knowledge” class, namely, the complete knowledges that are fruits of the subsequent tolerances (anvayakṣāntis) and subsequent knowledges (anvayajñānas). Here, the term “class” (pakṣa) designates the respective tolerances and knowledges.

(Question) Why are not all abandonments (prahāṇa) regarded as complete knowledges?

The stanza answers:

[Because there is uncontaminated acquisition of disconnection,

A breach in the Summit of Existence,

The destruction of two causes, and transcendence of a realm,

Nine kinds of complete knowledge are established.]

Complete knowledge has three characteristics: ⁽¹⁾ the acquisition of disconnection that is uncontaminated in nature, ⁽²⁾ the abandonment of a portion of the Summit of Existence (bhavāgra), and ⁽³⁾ the destruction of two causes. Only an abandonment possessing these three characteristics is called complete knowledge.

The abandonment achieved by an ordinary being may comprise the destruction of two causes; but an ordinary being never acquires uncontaminated disconnection and never “makes a breach” in any portion of the Summit of Existence.

For Noble Ones, from the time they enter the Path of Seeing until the third moment (duḥkhe ’nvayajñānakṣānti, tolerance of subsequent knowledge of suffering), their abandonment possesses the uncontaminated acquisition of disconnection, but they have not yet “made a breach” in the Summit of Existence and have not yet destroyed the two universal causes (sarvatragahetu) to be abandoned by seeing suffering and seeing its origin.

At the fourth moment (duḥkhe ’nvayajñāna, subsequent knowledge of suffering), a “breach” is first made in the Summit of Existence, and the same is true at the fifth moment (samudaye dharmajñānakṣānti, tolerance of Dharma-knowledge of the origin); nevertheless, the two causes have still not been destroyed. Only at the sixth, tenth, and fourteenth moments (dharmajñāna), and at the eighth, twelfth, and sixteenth moments (anvayajñānas, subsequent knowledges), does abandonment possess all three characteristics and thus come to be called complete knowledge.

As for the three kinds of complete knowledge comprising abandonments that are fruits of knowledge (jñāna), they are so designated because they possess the three characteristics above together with a fourth characteristic: “transcending a realm.” This means that the practitioner has become completely detached (vairāgya) from a particular realm—for example, detached from the Desire Realm in the seventh kind of complete knowledge, and so forth.

Some masters hold that there is still a fifth cause: separation from both bonds (ubhayasaṃyogaviyoga). Merely abandoning one class of defilements, those pertaining to the Path of Seeing, is insufficient; one must also abandon the defilements pertaining to seeing and to the Path of Cultivation that take the former class of defilements as their object.

However, this cause is already included within the characteristics of “destroying the two causes” and “transcending a realm”; therefore, it need not be established as a separate cause (ato na punar brūmaḥ).

(Question) How many kinds of complete knowledge may one possess?

The stanza answers:

[At the stage of seeing the truths, one possesses none,

Or possesses from one through five;

On the Path of Cultivation, one possesses six, one, or two;

And on the Path Beyond Training, one possesses only one.]

Treatise: An ordinary being possesses no complete knowledge.

On the Path of Seeing, the noble one has still not attained any comprehensive knowledge of abandonment up to the stage of patience with regard to the Dharma-knowledge of arising. The noble one first attains one comprehensive knowledge at the stages of Dharma-knowledge of arising and patience with regard to subsequent knowledge of arising; attains two comprehensive knowledges at the stages of subsequent knowledge of arising and patience with regard to the Dharma-knowledge of cessation (nirodhedharmajñānakṣānti); attains three comprehensive knowledges at the stages of Dharma-knowledge of cessation and patience with regard to subsequent knowledge of cessation;

attains four comprehensive knowledges at the stages of subsequent knowledge of cessation and patience with regard to the Dharma-knowledge of the path (mārgedharmajñānakṣānti); and attains five comprehensive knowledges at the stages of Dharma-knowledge of the path and patience with regard to subsequent knowledge of the path.

On the Path of Cultivation, the noble one possesses six comprehensive knowledges from the stage of subsequent knowledge of the path until detachment from the Desire Realm has not yet been attained—or until that detachment, once attained, has been lost through regression. Upon attaining this detachment—whether before or after insight into the truths (abhisamaya = the Path of Seeing)—the noble one possesses only the comprehensive knowledge of the complete abandonment of the fetters belonging to the lower part (avarabhāgīyaprahāṇaparijñā).

The noble one who attains the fruit of arhatship possesses only the comprehensive knowledge of the eternal exhaustion of all fetters (sarvasaṃyojanaparyādānaparijñā).

A noble one who regresses from the fruit of arhatship because of a defilement belonging to the Form Realm still belongs among the noble ones detached from the Desire Realm and therefore possesses only the comprehensive knowledge of the complete abandonment of the lower part. If the regression occurs because of a defilement of the Desire Realm, that person belongs among the noble ones not detached from the Desire Realm and possesses six comprehensive knowledges. If the regression occurs because of a defilement of the Formless Realm, that person belongs among the noble ones detached from the Form Realm and possesses two comprehensive knowledges: the complete abandonment of the lower part and the exhaustion of attachment to form (rūparāgakṣayaparijñā).

(Question) Why is only one comprehensive knowledge established for non-returners and arhats?

The stanza replies:

[Because they transcend a realm and attain a fruit,

In both cases the comprehensive knowledges are gathered into one.]

Commentary: All comprehensive knowledges are combined (saṃkalana, gathered together) into only one when a noble one transcends a realm and attains a fruit. Only non-returners and arhats fulfill both these conditions; therefore, their comprehensive knowledges are gathered into only one.

(Question) How many comprehensive knowledges are relinquished and attained (Vibhāṣā, 63, 1)?

The stanza replies:

[One, two, five, or six are relinquished;

The same numbers are attained, except that five are never attained.]

Commentary: A noble one who regresses from the fruit of arhatship or loses detachment from the Desire Realm relinquishes one comprehensive knowledge.

If a non-returner who has become detached from the Form Realm loses detachment from the Desire Realm, that person relinquishes two comprehensive knowledges.

In the case of noble ones who became detached from the Desire Realm before entering the Path of Seeing, upon reaching the sixteenth moment—subsequent knowledge of the path—they relinquish five comprehensive knowledges because at that time they attain the comprehensive knowledge of the complete abandonment of the lower part.

Those who had not become detached from the Desire Realm before entering the Path of Seeing attain the sixth comprehensive knowledge, which they relinquish together with the other five comprehensive knowledges upon becoming detached from the Desire Realm.

On either of the two Noble Paths, if one attains a comprehensive knowledge not previously attained, this is called attaining one comprehensive knowledge.

Those who lose detachment from the Formless Realm through regression attain two comprehensive knowledges, the sixth and the seventh.

Those who regress from the fruit of non-returning attain six comprehensive knowledges.