阿毘達磨俱舍論

Part 25

The preceding section stated that if an arhat belongs to the immovable (akopya) type, knowledge of non-arising (anutpādajñāna) will arise after the noble knowledge. Does saying this imply that there are still distinctions among arhats who were stream-enterers, and so forth?

(Answer) There are still distinctions.

(Question) What are these distinctions?

The stanza answers:

[Arhats are of six kinds:

Those subject to regression through those immovable.

The first five arise from faith-liberation

And are all called timely-liberated.

The last is untimely-liberated,

Arising from one previously attained through insight.]

Treatise: The sutras (Madhyama, 30, 4; Saṃyukta, 33, 10) state that there are six kinds of arhats: those whose nature is regression (parihāṇadharman), those whose nature is resolve (cetanādharman), those whose nature is self-protection (anurakṣaṇādharman), those who remain steadfast (sthitākampya), those whose nature is capable of penetration (prativedhanādharman), and those whose nature is immovable (akpopyadharman).

The first five kinds arise from those liberated through faith (śraddhādhimukta). The liberation of mind (cetovimukti) of these five kinds of arhats is dependent on an occasion (samayikī) and cherished (kāntā), because they must constantly preserve this liberation. Therefore, these arhats are called timely-liberated (samayavimukta). These kinds of arhats attain liberation (vimukta) only by depending upon (apekṣa) a suitable occasion. Thus, the above designation (samayavimukta) is formed by omitting the intervening word (the initial term) apekṣa (“depending upon”), just as the expression “butter jar” (ghṛtaghaṭa) denotes a jar containing butter.

For this kind of arhat, the cultivation of concentration (samādhisaṃmukhibhāva) must depend upon a suitable occasion: they must wait until the necessary requisites (upakaraṇa) are available, until they are free from illness, and until they have obtained a place for practice.

The liberation of immovable arhats cannot be disturbed, because they cannot regress from this liberation; therefore, they are called immovable. They are also called untimely-liberated (asamayavimukta). They enter concentration according to their own wishes and are therefore liberated without depending upon a suitable occasion (samaya).

Samaya also means a period of time. This means that the first five kinds of arhats may still regress from this liberation (vimukti), and thus they are “liberated for a period of time” (kālātara, temporarily liberated), whereas the sixth kind no longer regresses and is liberated forever (atyanvimukti); therefore, they are called untimely-liberated.

These arhats arise from those who have attained through insight (dṛṣṭiprāpta).

(Question) Do the six kinds of arhats described above possess these dispositions (gotra) from the outset, or do they acquire them only later?

The stanza answers:

[In some cases they are attained from the outset;

In some cases they are attained after the faculties have been refined.]

Treatise: In some cases, one is an arhat whose nature is resolve (cetanādharman) from the outset. In other cases, after having been an arhat whose nature is regression, one must purify or perfect (uttāpana) the faculties before becoming one whose nature is resolve. The same progression continues in this manner.

⁽¹⁾ An arhat whose nature is regression is an arhat who may still regress and is not one whose nature is resolve, and so forth, nor one whose nature is capable of penetration (prativedhanādharman).

⁽²⁾ An arhat whose nature is resolve is an arhat who must still bring his existence to an end (cetayitum), and is not one whose nature is self-protection (anurakṣaṇādharman), and so forth.

⁽³⁾ An arhat whose nature is self-protection is an arhat who must still guard himself.

⁽⁴⁾ A steadfast arhat is an arhat who remains undisturbed in the absence of powerful causes of regression (predominant conditions of regression), even without self-protection; that is, he continues to abide in the fruition. Such arhats do not advance further (vardhayitum), because they neither regress nor undertake preparatory effort (abhiyoga).

⁽⁵⁾ An arhat whose nature is capable of penetration (prativedhanādharman = prativedhanābhavya) is an arhat who, without preparatory effort (abhiyoga), is nevertheless able to “penetrate to” (prativeddhum) the immovable kind of arhat.

⁽⁶⁾ An immovable arhat is an arhat who can no longer regress.

While still trainees, the first two kinds lacked continuous and intense exertion (sātaya, satkṛtyaprayoga); the third kind possessed only continuous exertion; the fourth possessed only intense exertion; the fifth possessed both kinds of exertion but had dull faculties; only the sixth possessed both kinds of exertion and sharp faculties.

An arhat whose nature is regression does not necessarily regress; the same applies to the subsequent kinds: an arhat capable of penetration does not necessarily “penetrate to” the fruition of an immovable arhat. These noble ones bear their different names because there may be cases in which they regress, and so forth. Since this principle (Vibhāṣā, 62, 4) is accepted, it may be concluded that all six kinds of arhats can exist throughout the three realms.

However, if it is assumed that an arhat whose nature is regression is an arhat who necessarily regresses, and so forth, and that an arhat capable of penetration is one who necessarily penetrates to the higher state, the above conclusion must be modified: ⁽¹⁾ all six kinds of arhats exist in the Desire Realm; ⁽²⁾ only the two kinds—the steadfast and the immovable arhats—exist in the higher realms, because there is no (a) regression (parihāṇi) there, and therefore there are no arhats whose nature is regression or arhats whose nature is self-protection, since there is no need to guard against regression; (b) neither is there resolve (cetanā), and therefore there are no arhats whose nature is resolve;

(c) nor is there any perfecting of the faculties, and therefore there are no arhats capable of penetration, because these arhats must refine their faculties until they become exceedingly sharp before they can “penetrate to” and become immovable arhats.

(Question) Among the first five kinds, which regress from their disposition, and which regress from the fruition?

The stanza answers:

[Four kinds regress from their disposition;

Five kinds from the fruition; there is no regression from the first disposition or fruition.]

Treatise: Four kinds of arhats [from those whose nature is resolve through those capable of penetration] regress from their disposition; five kinds of arhats [from those subject to regression through those capable of penetration] also regress from the fruition.

However, there is no case of regression from the first disposition or the first fruition:

⁽¹⁾ A noble arhat does not regress from his original disposition, namely, the disposition attained before becoming an arhat, because this disposition has been made firm (dṛḍhīkṛta) by the path of the trainee and the path of the one beyond training. A noble trainee does not regress from his original disposition, because this disposition has been made firm by the mundane path and the supramundane path. Nevertheless, one may regress from a disposition attained through the refinement of the faculties (uttāpanāgatāt tu parihīyate).

⁽²⁾ A noble one does not regress from the first fruition attained, but may regress from the other fruitions. Thus, such a person will not regress from the fruition of stream-entry.

According to the two principles above, there are: ⁽¹⁾ three possible cases for arhats of the Fallible class: they may attain nirvana while retaining their own spiritual disposition (abiding in their own state and entering nirvana), they may perfect their faculties (advance their faculties), or they may fall back and return to the state of a trainee; ⁽²⁾ four possible cases for arhats of the Deliberative class: the same three cases as above, together with the possibility that they may fall back and return to the Fallible class of arhats;

⁽³⁾ and, successively, five, six, and seven possible cases for arhats of the Guarding, Abiding, and Capable-of-Progress classes, respectively (that is, with the addition of such cases as returning to the Deliberative class of arhats, and so forth) (Vibhāṣā 62, 5).

When an arhat returns to the state of a trainee, he abides in a spiritual disposition identical to his original disposition. Were this not so, then after attaining a higher spiritual disposition, a noble one ought only to advance and never fall back.

(Question) Why can one not fall back from the first fruit?

(Answer) Because the afflictions abandoned through seeing have no basis (avastuka = anadhiṣṭhāna). Indeed, it is only when the view of a real personality (satkāyadṛṣṭi) is the root that afflictions arise with the self (ātman) as their basis (ātmādhiṣṭhānapravṛtta, operating with the self as their locus); but in this case there is no self.

(Question) Does this mean, then, that these afflictions have as their object (ālambana) a nonexistent thing?

(Answer) No. Their objects are still the truths (they still contemplate the aggregates of clinging as impermanent, and so forth); therefore, their object is not a nonexistent thing. Nevertheless, they do not apprehend these objects correctly (vitathālambana, taking them as objects contrary to reality).

(Question) How do the afflictions abandoned through cultivation differ, since they too apprehend their objects incorrectly, just like the afflictions abandoned through seeing?

(Answer) They nevertheless differ from the afflictions abandoned through seeing. It is evident that the conception of self (ātmadṛṣṭi) mistakenly apprehends real dharmas such as form (rūpa), and so forth—which are neither a “self” nor a “conception of self”—as possessing the characteristics of an entity that acts and experiences, and as possessing the characteristics of a Great Lord (Īśvara). Other kinds of views, such as the view of extremes (antagrāhadṛṣṭi), and so forth, are likewise able to arise by taking this very characteristic of selfhood (ātmatva) as their basis.

Thus, their basis is not truly existent (afflictions based on a nonexistent thing), which means that they have no basis. In contrast, the afflictions other than those abandoned through seeing—that is, the afflictions abandoned through the Path of Cultivation (bhāvanā), such as greed, hatred, conceit, and doubt—have the character of attachment, aversion, complacency, and delusion with regard to form (rūpa), and so forth.

Therefore, speaking in absolute terms, they do have a basis. This is because their agreeable (amanāpa), disagreeable, and other objects truly exist, whereas no trace whatever of a self, what belongs to a self, a Great Lord, and so forth, exists.

Another explanation states that the afflictions abandoned through cultivation have a determinate basis (pratiniyata), possessing a distinct character such as being agreeable, disagreeable, and so forth. In the case of the afflictions abandoned through seeing, however, there is no determinate basis possessing the characteristics of a self or what belongs to a self; therefore, they have no basis.

Another point is that, in a noble one (Ārya = Śaikṣa) who does not reflect (upanidhyāyati = saṃtīrayati, examine carefully), the afflictions abandoned through cultivation may arise through a lapse of mindfulness; but these afflictions cannot arise in a noble one who carefully reflects. This is like mistaking a rope for a snake when one does not examine it carefully (Vibhāṣā, 8, 1); [likewise, through lack of attention, one may forget the metaphysical nature of agreeable things—that they are impermanent, suffering, and so forth]. In contrast, the error of the view of self cannot arise even in noble ones who do not carefully reflect, because this false view is merely a product of speculative examination (saṃtīrakatvāt).

Thus, a noble one cannot fall back from the abandonment of the afflictions that he has abandoned through the Path of Seeing (the noble abandonment through seeing).

The Sautrāntika masters say that a noble one can no longer fall back from the fruit of arhatship. Their position is correct with regard to both scriptural proof and rational proof.

1. Scriptural proof:

The Sutra (Madhyamāgama, 23, 12; Saṃyutta, iv, 25) says: “Bhikshus, what has been abandoned is precisely what has been abandoned by noble wisdom.”

The Sutra (Madhayama, 51, 18; Saṃyukta, 8, 16; Saṃyutta, iv, 25) says: “I declare that trainees must cultivate heedfulness.” The Blessed One does not say this with regard to arhats.

It is certain that the Blessed One said: “Ānanda, I declare that even for an arhat, possessions and renown are causes of obstruction.” Yet the Sutra (Madhyamāgama, 49, 21; Saṃyutta, i, 239) clearly states that if an arhat falls back, it is only a falling back from blissful abiding in the present life (dṛṣṭadharmasukhavihāra): “Concerning the immovable liberation of mind (akopyā cetovimukti), [a liberation] directly realized through the body, I declare that there is certainly no falling back from it.”

The Vaibhāṣikas reply, however, that the Blessed One said only that there is no falling back from the immovable liberation of mind; thus, falling back remains possible when this liberation is temporary (sāmayikī). We agree that there is falling back from the temporary liberation of mind. But what is this liberation? Is it, as you think, the nature of the fruit of arhatship? And is it not possible to understand that by “temporary liberation” the Blessed One meant the mundane stages of dhyana?

The concentration that comprises the fundamental stages of dhyana, when attained under certain conditions—for example, in a place without noise, and so forth—is still called “temporary liberation” (sāmayikī); it is also called “agreeable liberation” (kāntā), because whenever it is lost through falling back, one continues to desire (kāmanīya) to regain it in order to enjoy the blissful abidings in the present life (dṛṣṭadharmasukhavihāra). Another master (Bhadanta Rāma) says that this concentration is called “temporary liberation” because, being defiled, it belongs to the class of dharmas that “remain objects of desire.”

In contrast, the liberation constituting the quality of arhatship is not temporary, because it is continuously possessed (nityānugatatvāt; prātiyogena); nor is it an “agreeable” liberation, because one cannot seek to regain (prāthanīya) this liberation. If it were possible to fall back from the quality of arhatship, why would the Blessed One say that an arhat can fall back only from blissful abiding in the present life? Therefore, the immovable liberation of mind belongs to all arhats.

An arhat falls away from the blissful abiding in the present life when he loses mastery over meditative concentration because material gains cause his mind to become distracted (vyākṣipta); this is the case for arhats of dull faculties. If he belongs to those of sharp faculties, an arhat cannot fall away from the blissful abiding in the present life. An arhat who falls away from the bliss of the Dharma is called one whose nature is to fall away (parihānadharman); one who does not fall away from the bliss of the Dharma is called one whose nature is not to fall away (aparihānadharman). The cases of one whose nature is to deliberate, and so forth, are explained in the same way.

(Question) How do one whose nature is not to fall away, one who remains steadfast, and one who is immovable differ?

(Answer) The first has not brought his faculties to perfection (anuttāpanāgata): These faculties were sharp from the outset. The third has brought his faculties to perfection. Neither of these two falls away from the special meditative concentrations (samādhiviśeṣa, superior attainments) already acquired. The second no longer falls away from the qualities in which he abides; but he cannot produce other special qualities (guṇaviśeṣa), or, if he does produce them, he may still be shaken from them (tasmāt tu kampate). Such is the distinction among these three kinds of noble ones.

(Question) Nevertheless, in the case of Godhika (Āyuṣman Godhika), why was there no falling away from the fruit of arhatship?

(Answer) While still a trainee, because he had excessive attachment to meditative enjoyment (āsvādanā) and dull faculties, Godhika repeatedly fell away from temporary liberation. Out of spiritual urgency and disenchantment (saṃvega), Godhika took his own life with a knife. Because he had no attachment to his body and life, he attained the fruit of arhatship at the very moment of death and entered nirvana. Therefore, Godhika did not fall away from the fruit of arhatship.

The Daśottara Sutra says: “There is one Dharma that should be produced (utpādayitavya): temporary liberation of mind. There is one Dharma that should be realized: immovable liberation of mind.”

If temporary liberation of mind is a quality of an arhat, and this quality is therefore of two kinds, why is it that, among the scriptures, only the Daśottara Sutra mentions this quality twice under two different names? Moreover, no sutra says that “the quality of arhatship should be produced,” but only that “the quality of arhatship should be realized.”

Will you say that the quality of arhatship, when associated with dull faculties (mṛdvindriyasaṃgṛhīta), must be produced? What do you mean by saying this? Can the quality of arhatship be “produced”? If it can, then the quality of arhatship associated with sharp faculties would also have to be produced. If the first kind of the quality of arhatship can be produced, how much more so the second kind of the quality of arhatship.

Therefore, temporary liberation is not the quality of arhatship.

(Question) If so, why does the sutra speak of an arhat who is “temporarily liberated” (samayavimukta)?

(Answer) This is the case of an arhat who, because his faculties are dull, must depend upon suitable occasions for the manifestation of meditative concentration. The opposite is an arhat who is “liberated irrespective of occasion.”

According to the Abhidharma, there are three causes (sthāna) for the arising of sensual desire (kāmarāga): ⁽¹⁾ the latent tendency toward sensual desire has not been completely understood (prajñāta) and has not been eliminated; ⁽²⁾ conditions conducive to the outbreak of sensual desire are present; ⁽³⁾ there is incorrect attention (ayoniśomanasikāra). [But in the case of an arhat, all these causes cannot be present.]

Will it be said that the Abhidharma speaks only of sensual desire arising from the complete set of causes (paripūrṇakāraṇa) [while sensual desire may still arise without all the causes being present (aparipūrṇakāraṇa), that is, solely through the force of an external object (viṣaya)]? Yet what Dharma can arise without the complete set of its causes?

2. Proof by reasoning:

In an arhat, the Dharmas that counteract (pratipakṣa) the afflictions have arisen, and by the very nature of these Dharmas, the afflictions have been brought into a “state of absolute incapacity to arise” and have become Dharmas that cannot arise (anutpattidharman). How, then, could an arhat fall away?

Will you say that such Dharmas cannot arise in an arhat; that the afflictions still remain in an arhat in the form of seeds, and that these constitute seeds of afflictions that have not been completely uprooted forever? If so, how can it be said that an arhat is one who has exhausted all the outflows (kṣīṇāsrava)? And if he has not exhausted the outflows, how can he be called an arhat?

The Vaibhāṣikas, however, hold that the doctrine that an arhat cannot fall away contradicts the Discourse on the Simile of the Charcoal Pit (Aṅgārakarṣūpama).

This sutra (Saṃyutta, iv. 190; Saṃyukta, 43, 14) says: “For a learned noble disciple (Ārya Śrāvaka) who conducts himself according to such a principle and passes his time in this manner (evaṃ carata evaṃ viharatas), evil states of mind may still occasionally arise through a lapse of mindfulness.” And this learned noble disciple is not a trainee but an arhat, because the sutra further says: “For a long time, his mind has inclined toward seclusion from the afflictions, ….

His mind has inclined toward nirvana.” From other sutras (Aṅguttara, iv. 224; Saṃyukta, 26, 23), we also know that qualities such as “inclining the mind toward seclusion,” and so forth, are among the powers of an arhat. This power is further affirmed by the scriptural statement: “His mind has become cool (śīlībhūta), purged (vāntībhūta), with regard to all Dharmas that serve as abodes for the outflows.”

We reply: It is true that the sutras say this. Nevertheless, the Discourse on the Simile of the Charcoal Pit refers to trainees, not to arhats. Indeed, only with reference to trainees does the sutra say: “So long as the conduct of the bhikshus (cāra) has not yet been ‘clearly understood,’ afflictions may occasionally arise in him even while he conducts himself in this manner.”

The Vaibhāṣika masters maintain that falling away from the state of arhatship is possible.

(Question) Is it only arhats who have these six types of spiritual disposition, or do other noble ones also have them? If they do, can their faculties be cultivated?

The stanza answers:

[Trainees and ordinary beings also have six types;

Cultivation of the faculties does not occur on the path of seeing.]

Explanation: Trainees and ordinary beings also have these six spiritual dispositions. The spiritual dispositions of arhats also originate from these dispositions.

The faculties can be perfected (indriyasaṃcāra, cultivation of the faculties) outside the path of seeing, but not while one is proceeding along this noble path. The path of seeing operates with great rapidity (throughout all fifteen moments), and during this time the practitioner cannot perform the preparatory practice necessary for perfecting the faculties.

In some cases, the one who perfects the faculties is an ordinary being; but in other cases, the one who perfects the faculties is one liberated through faith (Śraddhādhimukta).

A sutra cited above states: “I declare that, with regard to the four kinds of pleasant abiding in the present life attained by a noble one, that noble one may fall away from any one of these four; but with regard to the immovable liberation of mind realized by a noble one, I declare that it is absolutely impossible to fall away from this liberation of mind.”

How do arhats fall away from the pleasant abidings in the present life?

The stanza answers:

[There are three kinds of falling away:

From what has been attained, what has not been attained, and enjoyment.

The Buddha has only the last kind;

Those of sharp faculties have the middle and last; those of dull faculties have all three.]

Exposition: There are three cases of falling away:

Falling away from the acquisition of an excellent quality (guṇa), that is, falling away from what has already been attained (falling away from the attained).

Failing to attain an excellent quality, that is, falling away from what has not yet been attained (falling away from the unattained).

Failing to bring into manifestation an excellent quality already attained, that is, falling away from its enjoyment (upabhoga).

Among these kinds of falling away: ⁽¹⁾ the Buddha falls away only from enjoyment: [because, mindful of the welfare and happiness of sentient beings, he ceases to enjoy those pleasant states]; ⁽²⁾ those of the Immovable Dharma fall away from enjoyment and from what has not yet been attained, because they have not necessarily attained the qualities belonging to superior individuals (pudgalaviśeṣa); ⁽³⁾ arhats who do not belong to the Immovable Dharma also fall away from what they have attained.

Thus, the fact that those of the Immovable Dharma fall away from enjoyment does not contradict the sutra cited above.

The masters who do not admit that falling away occurs (aparihāṇivādin, proponents of non-regression) say: “The uncontaminated liberation of all arhats is immovable. But those of the Immovable Dharma have been defined as we explained above; therefore, the objection cannot be raised: How do those of the Immovable Dharma fall away from pleasant states?”

(Question) When a noble one falls away from the fruit of arhatship, will he be reborn? After falling away, does he perform deeds that he did not perform while abiding in the fruit?

The stanza answers:

[While falling away from the fruit, he certainly

Cannot come to the end of his life;

What he did not do while abiding in the fruit,

He still does not do, because his sense of shame has increased.]

Exposition: A noble one never dies while in the stage of falling away from the fruit. The sutra states: “Bhikshus, a learned noble disciple may lose right mindfulness, and his mindfulness may become slow. Nevertheless, he can swiftly cast off, cause to disappear, destroy, and eliminate [this loss of mindfulness].”

If this were not so, then if one who had become an arhat but had fallen away from the fruit could still continue revolving in the cycle of birth and death, the holy life (brahmacarya) could no longer inspire confidence in sentient beings (anāśvāsika).

One who has fallen away from the fruit does not perform deeds that one abiding in the fruit could not perform. Even after falling away, he does not do anything contrary to the fruit, namely, deeds that violate the holy life (abrahmacarya). He is like a valiant warrior who may be shaken but cannot be brought down (śūrapraskhalanāpatnavat).

(Question) How many uninterrupted paths and how many paths of liberation are involved in perfecting the faculties?

The stanza answers:

[At the stage beyond training, cultivation of the faculties has

Nine uninterrupted paths and nine paths of liberation,

Because of long-standing habituation; a trainee has only one of each.

All are uncontaminated and depend upon humans in the three continents;

Those beyond training depend upon nine grounds,

Trainees upon only six grounds,

Because they relinquish the fruit and the path of superior progress,

And attain only the path of the fruit.]

Exposition: Those whose nature is to attain realization (prativedhanādharman), when perfecting their faculties and entering the lineage of those of the Immovable Dharma, must produce nine uninterrupted paths (ānantaryamārgas) and nine paths of liberation (vimuktamārgas), just as trainees attaining the fruit of arhatship [must become detached from the summit of existence].

(Question) Why is this so?

(Answer) Because those whose nature is to attain realization have become deeply habituated (abhyasta) to the lineage of those with dull faculties, they cannot transform this lineage without intense effort. Indeed, this lineage has been made firm by the path of training and the path beyond training.

One who belongs to the class of those liberated through faith (Śraddhādhimukta), when transforming the faculties in order to become one who has attained through views (Dṛṣṭprāpta), requires one uninterrupted path and one path of liberation.

In both cases, there is one path of preparation.

These uninterrupted paths and paths of liberation are all nonconcentrated and uncontaminated, because the faculties of an arhat cannot be transformed by contaminated paths.

(Question) Where can the faculties be transformed?

(Answer) The transformation of the faculties occurs only among humans. It does not occur elsewhere, because there is no falling away there.

(Question) Upon which grounds do trainees and those beyond training depend when transforming their faculties?

(Answer) Those beyond training depend upon nine grounds: the Preliminary Ground (anāgamya), the Intermediate Concentration (dhyānantara), the four dhyanas, and the three formless concentrations, [because the same fruit of arhatship can be attained in dependence upon these grounds].

Trainees depend upon six grounds, that is, excluding the three formless concentrations.

(Question) Why?

(Answer) When trainees perfect their faculties, they relinquish a fruit (sakṛdāgāmiphala), namely, the fruit attained by the path associated with dull faculties. They relinquish the path of superior progress (viśeṣa), that is, the progress they have attained—the path of preparation, the uninterrupted path, the path of liberation, and the path of superior progress—while becoming detached from the dhyanas, which was progress realized by means of dull faculties. They attain only a single fruit belonging to the lineage of sharp faculties, a fruit forming part of detachment from the Realm of Desire, and not the fruit of non-returning, which pertains to the Formless Realm.

Arhats, because their faculties are entirely different, have as many as nine grounds.

(Question) How many kinds of those beyond training are there?

The stanza answers:

[Seven kinds of shravakas and two Buddhas,

Differentiated by nine grades of faculties.]

Exposition: There are seven kinds of shravakas. Five begin with those of the Dharma of Regression, to which is added the kind belonging to the Immovable Dharma. This latter kind is divided into two, according to whether the arhat originally belonged to the immovable lineage or attained this lineage by perfecting the faculties.

The two Buddhas—the Pratyekabuddha and the Buddha, the Perfectly Awakened One—both belong to the immovable class.

Thus, there are altogether nine kinds of individuals (pudgalas), distinguished by faculties of the lowest-low grade, and so forth.

In general, all noble ones belong to one of seven kinds: ⁽¹⁾ follower through faith (Śraddhānusārin), ⁽²⁾ follower through Dharma (Dharmānusārin), ⁽³⁾ one liberated through faith (Śraddhādhimukta), ⁽⁴⁾ one who has attained through views (Dṛṣṭprāpta), ⁽⁵⁾ bodily witness (Kāyasākṣin), ⁽⁶⁾ one liberated through wisdom (Prajñāvimukta), and ⁽⁷⁾ one liberated in both ways (Ubhayatobhāgavimukta).

(Question) Why are seven kinds established? How many are distinct in terms of substantial entity (dravyatas)?

The stanza answers:

[Because of preparation, faculties, the concentration of cessation,

And liberation, seven kinds are established;

But considered in terms of substantial entity, there are only six,

Because each path has two kinds.]

Treatise: ⁽¹⁾ By preparatory practice (prayoga), as in the cases of the faith-follower and the Dharma-follower. At first, while still at the stage of an ordinary being, owing to faith (śraddhā), the first type, when prompted by another (parapratyayena, meaning that he hears from another the “meaning” of the smṛtyupasthānas, etc.), directs his attention (prayoga) to the objects (artheṣu), meaning that he applies himself to reflection and cultivation (cintābhāvanāsevanāt). The second type applies himself in the same way, but follows (anusāra) the Dharma—that is, the teaching concerning the twelve branches—by personally following (anusarati) the dharmas, namely the factors conducive to awakening (bodhipākṣikas, etc.).

⁽²⁾ By faculties, as in the cases of one liberated through faith and one who has attained through view. The faculties of these two types differ in being dull or keen because of the predominance (ādhikya), in the first case, of the resolve arising from faith (śraddhayā adhimokṣaḥ), and, in the second case, of wisdom (prajñā).

3. By meditative attainment (samāpatti), as in the case of the bodily witness, because this type has attained the attainment of cessation (nirodhasamāpatti).

4. By liberation, as in the case of one liberated through wisdom.

5. By meditative attainment and liberation, as in the case of one liberated in both ways.

Thus, considered by name, there are seven types in all; but considered substantially (dravyatas), there are only six.

On the path of seeing there are two types: the faith-follower and the Dharma-follower. On the path of cultivation, these two become, respectively, one liberated through faith and one who has attained through view; and on the path of no further training, they become one liberated at the appropriate time and one liberated irrespective of time.

The faith-follower is divided as follows: ⁽¹⁾ On the basis of faculties, into three types: Although the faculties of this type are inherently dull, they belong to the three different grades of inferior-inferior, inferior-middle, and inferior-superior. ⁽²⁾ On the basis of disposition, into five types: one subject to regression, and so forth. ⁽³⁾ On the basis of the path, into fifteen types, according to whether one is abiding in one of the eight receptivities or seven knowledges. ⁽⁴⁾ On the basis of detachment, into seventy-three types: The first remains bound by all the bonds of the Desire Realm (sakalabandhana, fully bound); the next nine have become detached from one through nine groups of bonds of the Desire Realm;

the following nine have become detached from one through nine groups of bonds of the first dhyāna; and so forth, continuing up to the Sphere of Nothingness (ākiṃcanya).

Eight times nine—including the detachments pertaining to the Desire Realm, the four dhyānas, and the three attainments of the Formless Realm—make seventy-two types; adding the “fully bound” type gives seventy-three. ⁽⁵⁾ On the basis of the supporting body (āśraya), into nine types: those born on one of the three continents (dvīpas), excluding the northern continent (Uttarakuru), and those born in one of the six heavens of the Desire Realm.

There is no path of seeing in the higher realms.

Thus, on the basis of all the foregoing distinctions, there are altogether 147825 types of faith-followers. Dharma-followers and the others are calculated in the same manner.

(Question) Why are they called “liberated in both ways” and “liberated through wisdom”?

The stanza answers:

[“Both,” because the attainment of cessation has been attained;

The remaining case is liberation through wisdom.]

Treatise: A noble one who has entered the attainment of complete cessation (nirodhasamāpatti) is called “liberated in both ways,” because through the power of wisdom (prajñā) and meditative concentration (samādhi), that person is liberated from the obstruction of afflictions (kleśavaraṇa) and the obstruction to liberation (vimokṣavaraṇa).

The Blessed One said: “One who has severed the five afflictions in this world and is no longer subject to regression is precisely a fully accomplished trainee.”

(Question) For what reasons are trainees and those beyond training called fully accomplished?

The stanza answers:

[A trainee is called fully accomplished

Through the three dharmas of faculties, fruit, and meditative attainment;

One beyond training is called fully accomplished

Through only the two dharmas of faculties and meditative attainment.]

Treatise: A fully accomplished trainee is of three kinds: accomplished in fruit, in faculties, and in meditative attainment.

One accomplished only in fruit is a non-returner of the type liberated through faith, but not a bodily witness, for that person has not attained the attainment of complete cessation.

One accomplished only in faculties is a noble one of the type who has attained through view but has not yet become detached from the Desire Realm.

One accomplished in fruit and faculties is a non-returner of the type who has attained through view but is not a bodily witness.

One accomplished in fruit and meditative attainment is a non-returner of the type liberated through faith who is also a bodily witness, having attained the attainment of complete cessation.

One accomplished in fruit, faculties, and meditative attainment is a non-returner of the type who has attained through view and is also a bodily witness.

A trainee cannot be accomplished solely through meditative attainment, because the attainment of complete cessation (nirodhasamāpatti) is regarded as a fruit of a non-returner; therefore, in this case, there is also accomplishment through the fruit. Nor can a trainee be accomplished solely on the basis of faculties and meditative attainment.

One beyond training may be accomplished in faculties and meditative attainment. There is no one beyond training who is not accomplished in fruit; therefore, accomplishment in fruit is not counted in this case.

One liberated through wisdom (prajñāvimukta) who is liberated irrespective of time is accomplished through faculties.

One liberated in both ways (ubhayatobhāgavimukta) who is liberated at the appropriate time is accomplished through meditative attainment.

One liberated in both ways who is liberated irrespective of time is accomplished through faculties and meditative attainment.

(Question) Previously, innumerable different paths were mentioned, such as the mundane path (laukikamārga), the supramundane path (lokottara), the path of seeing (darśana), the path of cultivation (bhāvanā), the path of no further training (aśaikṣa), the path of preparatory practice (prayoga), the uninterrupted path (ānantarya), the path of liberation (vimukti), and the path of special progress (viśeṣamārga). In brief, how many principal paths are there?

The stanza answers:

[All paths should be understood,

In brief, to be only four:

The path of preparatory practice, the uninterrupted path,

The path of liberation, and the path of special progress.]

Treatise: The path of preparatory practice—the path of application or preliminary training—is the path by virtue of which the uninterrupted path that follows it can subsequently arise.

The uninterrupted path—the path that cannot be obstructed—is the path by virtue of which an obstruction (āvaraṇa) can be severed.

The path of liberation—the path of release—is the first path to arise unbound by the obstructions severed by the uninterrupted path.

The path of special progress—the most excellent path—is a path different from the preceding path.

(Question) What is the meaning of the word “path” (mārga)?

(Answer) A path is the road to nirvana, because it leads to nirvana, or because nirvana is attained by means of it.

(Question) How can the path of liberation and the path of special progress be called “paths” when the attainment of nirvana depends only upon the path of preparatory practice and the uninterrupted path?

(Answer) Because the path of liberation and the path of special progress resemble the path of severance (prahāṇamārga = ānantarya) with respect to their objects of cognition, namely the Four Noble Truths; their aspects, namely impermanence and the other aspects; and their purity (anāsrava). They are distinguished by their supreme character (adhimātratara), because their causes include all the causes of the other “paths of severance” together with those very “paths of severance” themselves. Furthermore, it is precisely by means of these two paths that one progressively attains other, higher paths: [the path of liberation is necessary in order to attain a new uninterrupted path]. Alternatively, it is because these two paths enable one to enter nirvana without remainder.

The path is also called a course of practice (pratipad, mode of progress), because by means of this course one reaches nirvana.

(Question) How many such courses of practice are there?

The stanza answers:

[The courses of practice are of four kinds:

Pleasant, when based on the fundamental dhyanas;

Painful, when based on the other stages;

Slow or swift, according to whether the faculties are dull or sharp.]

Exposition: The paths—preparatory practice and so forth—cultivated on the basis of the stages of dhyana, that is, while the practitioner abides in these dhyanas, constitute the pleasant course of practice (sukhā pratipad, pleasant mode of progress). This is because these dhyanas possess all their factors and a perfect balance between calm abiding (śamatha) and insight (vipaśyanā); therefore, in the dhyanas, this course proceeds without requiring any exertion.

The path in the preliminary stage, the intermediate dhyana, and the concentrations of the Formless Realm constitutes the painful course of practice (duḥkhā pratipad, painful mode of progress), because these kinds of concentration do not possess all the factors and lack a balance between calm abiding and insight. In the preliminary stage and the intermediate dhyana (dhyānāntara), the power of insight is great but that of calm abiding is slight; in the Formless concentrations, the reverse is true.

When the faculties are dull, this course, whether pleasant or painful, is called the course of “slow comprehension” (dhandhābhijñā, slow progress); when the faculties are keen, it is called “swift comprehension” (swift progress).

The course is called “slow comprehension” when comprehension (abhijñā), or prajñā, in this course is slow (dhandhā abhijñāsyām). “Comprehension” is equivalent to prajñā, and “slow” (dhanda) is equivalent to “dull” (manda). The course is called “swift comprehension” when comprehension in this course is swift, that is, when prajñā becomes extremely keen in relation to this course.

Alternatively, it may be explained thus: The comprehension of a person with a dull mind is slow…; the comprehension of a person with a sharp mind is swift.

The path is also called the factors conducive to awakening (bodhipākṣika, factors of awakening).

(Question) How many such factors of awakening are there?

The stanza answers:

[The factors of awakening are divided into thirty-seven kinds:

The four establishments of mindfulness, and so forth.

Awakening is the Knowledge of Exhaustion and the Knowledge of Non-Arising;

Because they conduce to these knowledges, they are called factors.]

Exposition: There are thirty-seven factors of awakening: the four establishments of mindfulness (smṛtyupasthānas), the four right efforts (samyakpradhānas), the four bases of supernormal power (ṛddhipādas), the five faculties (indriyas), the five powers (balas), the seven factors of awakening (bodhyaṅgas), and the eight factors of the Noble Path (āryamārgāṅgas).

The Knowledge of Exhaustion (kṣayajñāna) and the Knowledge of Non-Arising (anutpādajñāna) are awakening (bodhi) itself. Because of the differences among the noble ones who attain awakening, awakening is divided into three kinds: the awakening of a śrāvaka (śrāvakabodhi), the awakening of a pratyekabuddha (pratyekabuddhabodhi, the bodhi of a solitary Buddha), and unsurpassed complete and perfect awakening (anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi). Indeed, through these two kinds of knowledge, ignorance is utterly eradicated (aśesāvidyāprahāṇāt); through the Knowledge of Exhaustion one truly knows (avabodha) that the task has been completed; through the Knowledge of Non-Arising one knows that the task will never have to be completed again.

Because they are in conformity (anuloma) with awakening, these thirty-seven dharmas are called factors of awakening, that is, dharmas that aid awakening.

(Question) Are the intrinsic natures of these thirty-seven factors of awakening distinct?

The stanza answers:

[Considered in terms of entities, these factors of awakening are only ten:

Prajñā, effort, concentration, faith,

Mindfulness, joy, equanimity, pliancy,

Morality, and investigation.]

Exposition: Considered in terms of names, there are thirty-seven factors of awakening; but considered in terms of entities, there are only ten: faith (śraddhā), effort (vīrya), mindfulness (smṛti), prajñā, concentration (samādhi), equanimity, joy, pliancy, morality, and investigation.

The intrinsic natures of the establishments of mindfulness, the right efforts, and the bases of supernormal power are respectively prajñā, effort, and concentration.

i. Thus, first there are five entities: faith, effort, mindfulness, concentration, and prajñā. These five entities, under their own respective names, constitute the five faculties and the five powers.

Among these five entities, prajñā constitutes: (a) the four establishments of mindfulness; (b) one of the factors of awakening (bodhyaṅga), namely, the awakening factor of investigation of dharmas (dharmapravicayasaṃbodhyaṅga); and (c) one of the factors of the Path (mārgāṅga), namely, right view (samyagdṛṣṭi).

Effort constitutes: (a) the four right efforts; (b) one of the factors of awakening, namely, the awakening factor of energy (vīryasaṃbodhyaṅga); and (c) one of the factors of the Path (mārgāṅga), namely, right effort (samyagvyāyāma).

Concentration constitutes: (a) the four bases of supernormal power; (b) one of the factors of awakening, namely, the awakening factor of concentration (samādhisaṃbodhyaṅga); and (c) one of the factors of the Path, namely, right concentration (samyaksamādhi).

Mindfulness constitutes: (a) one of the factors of awakening, namely, the awakening factor of mindfulness (smṛtisaṃbodhyaṅga); and (b) one of the factors of the Path, namely, right mindfulness (samyaksmṛti).

ii. What further entities are there besides the first five mentioned above?—Among the factors of awakening are the awakening factor of joy (prītisaṃbodhyaṅga), the awakening factor of pliancy (praśrabdhisaṃbodhyaṅga), and the awakening factor of equanimity (upekṣāsaṃbodhyaṅga); among the factors of the Path are right intention (samyaksaṃkalpa) and the three factors of morality (śīlāṅga): right speech (samyagvāc), right action (samyakkarmānta), and right livelihood (samyagājīva). These factors of morality are collectively counted as one entity, namely morality.

Thus, the factors of awakening comprise ten entities in all.

According to the Vibhāṣā, there are eleven entities in all: right speech and right action constitute one entity, while right livelihood is counted separately as another. Thus, in addition to the preceding nine entities, there are two entities belonging to morality (śīla).

(Question) Why is it said that the intrinsic natures of the establishments of mindfulness, the right efforts, and the bases of supernormal power are prajñā, effort, and concentration?

The stanza answers:

[The four establishments of mindfulness, the four right efforts,

And the four bases of supernormal power are designated, according to predominance,

As prajñā, effort, and concentration;

They are also collections of qualities arising from preparatory practice.]

Exposition: This is said with reference to the predominant factor (yathāpradhānam) in the establishments of mindfulness and so forth; nevertheless, all these factors of awakening are also collective groups of qualities (guṇa), undefiled or defiled, arising from preparatory practice (prāyogika), namely, hearing, reflection, and cultivation.

(Question) Why is effort called “right exertion”?

(Answer) Because through effort, body, speech, and mind are rightly applied (pradhīyante).

(Question) Why is concentration called a “base of supernormal power”?

(Answer) Because concentration is the foundation (pāda = pratiṣṭhā) of supernormal power (ṛddhi), that is, the “result” consisting in the attainment of all qualities or spiritual excellences (sarvaguṇasaṃpatti).

But some masters (Vaibhāṣikas) maintain that “supernormal power” is concentration itself, and that the four dharmas—aspiration (chanda), mind (citta), effort (vīrya), and investigation (mīmāṃsā)—are the “feet” or bases (pāda) of this “supernormal power.” If so, it would have to be said that the factors of awakening comprise as many as thirteen entities, since aspiration and mind would have to be added. Moreover, to maintain that “supernormal power” is concentration contradicts the sutra. The sutra (Mahāvyutpatti, 15; Aṅguttara, iii. 280; Dīgha, i. 77) says: “What is supernormal power (ṛddhi)?—It is when a practitioner accomplishes various kinds of miraculous power: being one, the practitioner becomes many”; and so forth.

(Question) Why are faith, effort, and so forth called faculties and powers?

(Answer) Because the factors of awakening may respectively be weak (mṛdu) or strong (adhimātra); the faculties can be injured or subdued (avamardanīya), but the powers cannot be so treated. (Vibhāṣā, 141, 9).

(Question) How is the order of the faculties explained?

(Answer) To attain the fruit (phala) in which one has placed faith (śraddhā), one must necessarily arouse effort (vīryam ārabhate). Once effort has been aroused, there is establishment of mindfulness (smṛtyupasthiti). When mindfulness has been established, one must concentrate the mind (samādhi) to avoid distraction. Once the mind is concentrated, knowledge conforming to its object—knowledge of things as they really are—will arise.

(Question) At which stages are the various factors of awakening established and made predominant?

The stanza answers:

[At the stages of initial practice, aids to discernment,

The path of cultivation, and the path of seeing,

The seven groups beginning with the establishments of mindfulness

Increase in this order.]

Treatise: At the stage of the beginner (ādikārmika) are the establishments of mindfulness, because this is the stage at which the body and so forth are examined.

At the stage of heat (uṣmagata) are the right exertions, because this is the stage at which efforts (vīrya) increase, and this increase is precisely the principle of progress (viśeṣādhigama).

At the stage of the summit (mūrdhan) are the bases of supernatural power, because through these bases of supernatural power the wholesome roots are preserved from regression.

At the stage of receptivity (kṣānti) are the faculties, because at this stage faith, effort, and so forth have acquired a predominant character that prevents the practitioner from regressing.

At the stage of the highest mundane dharmas (agradharmas) are the powers, because at this stage faith, effort, and so forth can no longer be overpowered by the afflictions—which can no longer become manifest—or by other mundane dharmas.

At the stage of the path of cultivation (bhāvanāmārga) are the factors of awakening, because this path is close to awakening (bodhyāsanna), namely, the two kinds of knowledge of exhaustion and knowledge of non-arising, from which the path of cultivation is separated by the path of seeing.

At the stage of the path of seeing (darśanamārga) are the factors of the path, because this path has the character of movement (gamanaprabhāvita) and because it proceeds very swiftly.

[The path of seeing precedes the path of cultivation; why is that order not followed here?] The sutra mentions the factors of awakening (bhāvanāmārga) first and the factors of the path (darśanamārga) afterward in order to establish an order corresponding to the number of factors: first the seven factors and then the eight factors. Investigation of dharmas (dharmapravicaya) is both awakening and a factor of awakening; right view is both the path and a factor of the path. (Vibhāṣā, 141, 9).

The foregoing is the position of the Vibhāṣā.

Other masters have demonstrated the order (ānupūrvi) of the factors conducive to awakening (bodhipakṣyas) without disrupting the prescribed progression by placing the path of seeing first and the path of cultivation afterward:

⁽¹⁾ First are the establishments of mindfulness, whose purpose is to restrain (nigraha) minds (buddhi) that are naturally scattered among all kinds of different objects (bahuvidhaviṣayavyāsekavisārin). The four establishments of mindfulness bind the mind, for, as the sutra says: “…for the purpose of eliminating thoughts of sensual desire (kāmasaṃkalpa; anubhūtaviṣayasmṛtisaṃkalpa), recollective thoughts that rest upon craving (gardhāśritānāṃ smarasaṃkalpānām).” (Madhyama, 51, 20).

⁽²⁾ Second is effort: Effort increases through the power of the establishments of mindfulness and through mastery and control (pradhāna) of the mind so as to accomplish four tasks: abandoning unwholesome dharmas that have arisen, preventing unarisen unwholesome dharmas from arising, and so forth. These are precisely the four “right exertions” (samyakpradhānas).

⁽³⁾ Next, through the purification (viśodhanāt) of concentration (samādhi), the bases of supernatural power arise and are realized (prabhāvyante).

⁽⁴⁾ By relying upon concentration, faith, effort, and so forth become predominant conditions (adhipatibhūta) for supramundane dharmas (lokottaradharmas); they bring these dharmas forth (tadāvāhakatvāt), and these are precisely the faculties.

⁽⁵⁾ The same kinds of faith, effort, and so forth, when they overcome the manifestation of the opposing dharmas associated with them (nirjitavipakṣasamudācāra), are precisely the powers.

⁽⁶⁾ At the path of seeing are the factors of awakening, because this is the first time the practitioner comprehends the true nature of dharmas. [Awakening means undefiled wisdom (anāsrava).]

⁽⁷⁾ At both the path of seeing and the path of cultivation are also the factors of awakening. The sutra says: “The Noble Eightfold Path is thus brought to perfection through cultivation (bhāvanā); the four establishments of mindfulness are brought to perfection through cultivation…; the seven factors of awakening are brought to perfection through cultivation.”

The sutra further says: “Bhikshus, when it is said, ‘Speak the truth, as it really is,’ this refers to the Four Noble Truths; bhikshus, when it is said, ‘Proceed along the path that has been comprehended,’ this refers to the Noble Eightfold Path.”

Thus, both the path of seeing and the path of cultivation possess the Noble Eightfold Path; this shows that the order in which the factors of awakening precede the factors of the path is correct.

(Question) Among the “dharmas conducive to awakening” (bodhipākṣikadharma), how many are defiled and how many are undefiled?

The stanza answers:

[The seven factors of awakening and the eight factors of the path

Are all undefiled;

The three groups—the four, the five faculties, and the five powers—

Are each of both kinds.]

Treatise: The factors of awakening and the factors of the path are all undefiled in nature because they occur on the path of seeing and the path of cultivation. There certainly are mundane forms of right view and so forth, but they are not called factors of the path.

The other dharmas conducive to awakening may be either defiled or undefiled.

(Question) How many dharmas conducive to awakening are present in the various planes?

The stanza answers:

[In the first dhyana, all are present;

In the preliminary stage, except the factor of joy;

In the second dhyana, except initial application of thought;

In the third, fourth, and intermediate dhyanas, except both;

In the first three planes of the Formless Realm,

Except the factors of morality and the two just mentioned;

In the Desire Realm and the Peak of Existence,

Except the factors of awakening and the factors of the path.]

Treatise: The first dhyana possesses all thirty-seven dharmas.

In the preliminary stage, joy (prīti) is excluded.

(Question) Why is the awakening factor of joy absent from the preliminary stage?

(Answer) Because the approach to dhyana (sāmantaka) is attained only through forceful effort (balavāhanīya), and the practitioner still fears regressing to a lower plane.

In the second dhyana, the path factor of right intention (saṃkalpa) is absent, leaving only thirty-six factors conducive to awakening. Right intention is absent because initial application of thought (vicāra) is absent there.

In the third and fourth dhyanas, joy and right intention are absent, leaving only thirty-five factors conducive to awakening.

The intermediate dhyana likewise possesses thirty-five factors conducive to awakening; that is, joy and right intention are also excluded.

In the first three formless attainments, the three factors of morality—right speech, right action, and right livelihood—are absent, as are joy and right intention; thus, each attainment possesses only thirty-two factors conducive to awakening.

In the Desire Realm and at the Peak of Existence, the factors of awakening and the factors of the path are absent because these two planes lack the undefiled path. Thus, only twenty-two factors conducive to awakening remain in each plane.

(Question) When does a practitioner who cultivates the factors conducive to awakening attain verified purity (avetyaprasādas)—that is, the four kinds of faith and purity accompanying wisdom?

The stanza answers:

[There are four kinds of verified purity:

In the Buddha, Dharma, Sangha, and morality.

Upon seeing three truths, one attains verified purity in the Dharma and morality;

Upon seeing the path, one additionally attains verified purity in the Buddha and Sangha.

The Dharma comprises all three truths

And the paths of bodhisattvas and Pratyekabuddhas.

Faith and morality constitute their essence.

All four kinds are undefiled.]

Treatise: When contemplating (abhisamaya) the first three truths, one attains verified purity concerning the Dharma and the pure precepts cherished by the noble ones (the morality cherished by the noble ones).

When contemplating the truth of the path, one attains verified purity concerning the Buddha and the Sangha (śrāvakasaṃgha). The word “also” above implies that the practitioner also attains verified purity concerning the Dharma and the precepts.

Purity (prasāda) concerning the Buddha is precisely purity concerning the dharmas of one beyond training, that is, the dharmas constituting a Buddha. Likewise, when speaking of the Sangha (saṃgha), this refers to the dharmas of those in training and those beyond training, that is, the dharmas constituting the Sangha.

(Question) In the expression “verified purity concerning the Dharma,” how should the word Dharma be understood?

(Answer) The Dharma is the three truths together with the paths of the pratyekabuddhas and bodhisattvas. Therefore, when contemplating the Four Noble Truths, one attains verified purity concerning the Dharma.

Thus, in terms of designation, there are four distinct kinds of “purity” (prasāda), owing to the diversity of the objects upon which purity focuses.

In terms of substance, however, these four kinds of purity consist of only two things: faith and morality.

Verified purity concerning the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha has faith (śraddhā) as its nature. The precepts cherished by the noble ones have morality (śīla) as their nature. Thus, there are only two things.

(Question) Are these two things contaminated or uncontaminated?

(Answer) All four kinds of verified purity are uncontaminated.

(Question) What does “verified purity” mean?

(Answer) It is the faith that follows the correct contemplation of the truths.

The kinds of verified purity are arranged according to the order in which they are brought into direct presence (saṃmukhīkaroti) upon emerging from contemplation (vyutthita).

(Question) How are they brought into direct presence upon emerging from contemplation?

(Answer) By saying: “Oh! The Blessed One is completely awakened! The true Dharma and Vinaya have been expounded with perfect clarity! The noble Sangha (śrāvakasaṃgha) practices rightly!” By speaking thus, one brings these kinds of verified purity into direct presence, for the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha are respectively the physician, the medicine, and the caregiver of the sick.

Because the purity of morality arises from purity of mind, this purity is called the fourth, that is, the last: it is precisely when the mind possesses such faith (prasanna) that the practitioner attains the precepts cherished by the noble ones. Or the purity of morality is mentioned last because, if the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha are regarded respectively as the physician, the medicine, and the caregiver of the sick, then purity of morality must be regarded as health (ārogya). Alternatively, the Buddha is the guide, the Dharma is the road, the Sangha is the traveling merchant, and the morality of the noble ones is the vehicle.

The sutra states that one in training is endowed with eight factors (aṅga), namely, the eight factors of the Noble Path (mārgāṅga) belonging to those in training; and that one beyond training is endowed with ten factors, namely, the eight factors of the Noble Path belonging to those beyond training, together with the two additional factors of right liberation beyond training (aśaikṣī samyagvimukti) [that is, the perfect liberation of an arhat] and right knowledge beyond training (aśaikṣa samyagjñāna) [that is, knowledge of the attainment of this liberation].

(Question) Why does the sutra not mention right liberation and right knowledge with respect to those in training?

The stanza answers:

[Because those in training remain bound,

They lack the factors of right liberation and right knowledge.

Conditioned and unconditioned liberation

Are resolute acceptance and cessation through discernment.

Conditioned liberation is a factor beyond training,

And, being of two kinds, constitutes the aggregate of liberation.

Right knowledge is like what was said concerning awakening:

It is the knowledge of exhaustion and the knowledge of non-arising.]

Treatise: Those in training are still bound because the bonds of the afflictions remain. How, then, can one in training be regarded as liberated? A person who has relinquished only part of the bonds cannot be called liberated. Since liberation is not yet present in such a person, that person still cannot possess the knowledge of having attained liberation (vimuktijñāna).

By contrast, those beyond training have been completely liberated from all bonds. Therefore, they fully possess the qualities and manifestations (prabhāvita = prakarṣita) of liberation from the afflictions, as well as immediate personal knowledge of this liberation (vimuktipratyātmajñāna). Thus, only those beyond training possess both factors of right liberation and right knowledge.

(Question) What does liberation mean?

(Answer) Liberation is both conditioned (saṃskṛta) and unconditioned (asaṃskṛta). The abandonment (prahāṇa = pratisaṃkhyānirodha) of the afflictions is unconditioned liberation; the resolute acceptance (adhimokṣa) of those beyond training is conditioned liberation. It is conditioned liberation that is called a factor beyond training, because the factors of right view and so forth are all conditioned.

The sutra (Saṃyukta, 3, 6) divides conditioned liberation into two kinds: liberation of mind (cetovimukti) and liberation through wisdom (prajñāvimukti) [liberation from craving (rāgavirāgāt) is liberation of mind; liberation from ignorance (avidyāvirāgāt) is liberation through wisdom]. Conditioned liberation also constitutes what is called the aggregate of liberation (vimuktiskandha).

However, some maintain that if the aggregate of liberation were merely resolute acceptance, how could the sutra be explained? The sutra (Saṃyukta, 3, 6) says: “O Vyāghrabodhāyanas! What is the essential factor in the purification of liberation? It is the mind of a bhikṣu that has become detached and liberated from craving (rāga); the mind of this bhikṣu has become detached and liberated from hatred and delusion (dveṣa, moha). Thereupon, either because the perfection of the aggregate of liberation has not yet been completed, or in order to sustain (anugraha) the aggregate of liberation that has already been perfected, there arise aspiration (chanda), diligence (vīrya), and so forth. This is the foremost essential factor.”

The passage above shows that resolute acceptance does not constitute liberation. This liberation must be the purity (vaimalya = anāsravatva) of mind arising from the abandonment of afflictions such as craving (rāga), that is, afflictions eliminated by a kind of correct knowledge (tattvajñāna, true knowledge).

The explanation of right liberation (samyagvimukti) is now complete.

(Question) How does right knowledge (samyagjñāna) differ from right liberation?

(Answer) Awakening (bodhi), comprising the knowledge of exhaustion and the knowledge of non-arising as explained above, is right knowledge, the tenth factor of those beyond training.

(Question) Which mind—past, future, or present—is liberated (vimucyate)?

The stanza answers:

[The mind beyond training, when it arises,

Is liberated from obstruction.]

Treatise: The root treatise (Jñānaprasthāna, 5, 20) says: “The future mind of one beyond training is liberated from obstruction.”

(Question) What is the obstruction?

(Answer) It is the possession (prāpti) of the afflictions [belonging to the ninth category of the Summit of Existence]; this possession constitutes an obstruction (vibandha) to the arising of the mind beyond training. At the moment of the vajra-like samādhi (Vajropamasamādhi), this possession is abandoned; the mind beyond training arises and is liberated. Once this possession has been abandoned, the mind beyond training has arisen and has been liberated.

(Question) What, then, of the mind beyond training that has not yet arisen at the moment of the vajra-like samādhi, or of the mundane mind that has arisen in one beyond training?

(Answer) These two kinds of mind are also liberated; however, the liberated mind referred to in the root treatise is precisely the mind of one beyond training that will arise in the future (niyatam utpattau = utpādābhimukham).

(Question) From what is the mundane mind of one beyond training liberated?

(Answer) It is likewise liberated from the acquisition of the afflictions that obstruct the arising of this mind.

(Question) This kind of mundane mind does not arise among those in training; why is it not said that this mind is also liberated?

(Answer) The mundane mind of those in training is unlike the mundane mind of those beyond training, because in those beyond training it is not accompanied (sahita) by the acquisition of afflictions.

(Question) By which path—past, future, or present—is the obstruction to the arising of the mind of one beyond training eliminated?

The stanza answers:

道唯正滅位　　 能令彼障斷.

[Only when the path is in the phase of ceasing

Can it eliminate this obstruction.]

Treatise: The phrase “is ceasing” is intended to indicate the present.

The root treatise and this treatise speak of unconditioned liberation. Moreover, the sutras (Saṃyukta, 17, 8; Dīrgha, 8, 11) and the root treatise also speak of three dhatus (dhātu): the dhatu of abandonment (prahāṇadhātu), the dhatu of dispassion (virāgadhātu), and the dhatu of cessation (nirodhadhātu).

(Question) How is unconditioned liberation related to these three dhatus?

The stanza answers:

[Unconditioned liberation is the three dhatus:

The dhatu of dispassion is precisely the relinquishment of craving;

The dhatu of abandonment is the elimination of the other fetters;

The dhatu of cessation is the cessation of phenomena.]

Treatise: Unconditioned liberation is the three dhatus. The elimination of craving (rāga) is precisely the dhatu of dispassion. The elimination of the remaining afflictions is the dhatu of abandonment. The elimination of phenomena such as contaminated form (rūpa), and so forth—that is, an elimination that is not the elimination of afflictions—is precisely the dhatu of cessation.

(Question) Does a practitioner attain disenchantment (nirvidyate) by means of the very dharmas upon which the practitioner relied to attain dispassion (virajyate)?

The stanza answers:

[There is disenchantment when wisdom takes suffering and its origin as its objects;

There is dispassion when wisdom takes the Four Noble Truths as its objects and eliminates afflictions;

Since their respective scopes differ in breadth,

The four alternatives are established.]

Treatise: Only through the kinds of patience (kṣāntis) and knowledge (jñāna) concerning the truth of suffering and the truth of origin does the practitioner attain disenchantment; this is not attained through the other kinds of patience and knowledge.

The patiences (that is, the path of seeing) and the knowledges (that is, the path of cultivation) concerning the truths of suffering, origin, cessation, and the path, upon which the practitioner relies to eliminate afflictions, are also precisely the patiences and knowledges upon which the practitioner relies to attain dispassion.

Thus, there are four cases in all:

⁽¹⁾ Disenchantment without dispassion: With the patiences and knowledges concerning suffering and origin, if the practitioner does not eliminate afflictions, the practitioner attains only disenchantment, because these patiences and knowledges have only objects that induce disenchantment as their objects.

⁽²⁾ Dispassion without disenchantment: With the patiences and knowledges concerning cessation and the path, the practitioner eliminates afflictions and therefore attains only dispassion. These patiences and knowledges have only objects that inspire delight as their objects (nirvedavastu, objects of disenchantment).

⁽³⁾ Both disenchantment and dispassion: With the patiences and knowledges concerning suffering and origin, if the practitioner eliminates afflictions, the practitioner attains both dispassion and disenchantment.

⁽⁴⁾ Neither disenchantment nor dispassion: With the patiences and knowledges concerning cessation and the path, if the practitioner does not eliminate afflictions, the practitioner attains neither dispassion nor disenchantment.

In the first and fourth cases, a practitioner who has become free from sensual desire before entering the path of seeing does not eliminate afflictions by means of the patiences regarding knowledge of dharmas (dharmajñānakṣāntis) or the knowledges of dharmas (dharmajñānas). Nor does the practitioner eliminate afflictions by means of the knowledges that form part of the paths of preparation, liberation, and further progress.