阿毘達磨俱舍論

Part 25

It was stated above that if an arhat belongs to the immovable (akopya) class, the knowledge of non-arising (anutpādajñāna) will arise after the noble knowledge. Does 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 classes:

Those subject to falling away, up to the immovable.

The first five arise from those liberated through faith;

They are all called timely liberated.

The last is untimely liberated,

Arising from one previously attained through view.]

Commentary: The sutras (Madhyama, 30, 4; Saṃyukta, 33, 10) teach that there are six kinds of arhat: one subject to falling away (parihāṇadharman), one intent upon dying (cetanādharman), one who preserves the attainment (anurakṣaṇādharman), one who abides securely (sthitākampya), one capable of penetration (prativedhanādharman), and one who is immovable (akopyadharman).

The first five kinds arise from those liberated through faith (śraddhādhimukta). The liberation of mind (cetovimukti) of these five kinds of arhat is opportune (samayikī) and cherished (kāntā), because they must constantly safeguard this liberation. Therefore, these arhats are called timely liberated (samayavimukta). These classes of arhat become liberated (vimukta) only by depending upon (apekṣa) a suitable occasion. Thus, the above designation (samayavimukta) is formed by omitting the intervening word apekṣa, “depending upon,” just as the expression “ghee jar” (ghṛtaghaṭa) denotes a jar that contains ghee.

For arhats of these classes, the cultivation of meditative concentration (samādhisaṃmukhibhāva) depends upon a suitable occasion: they must wait until the necessary requisites (upakaraṇa) are available, until they are free from illness, and until they obtain a suitable place for practice.

The liberation of immovable arhats cannot be disturbed, because they cannot fall away from this liberation; hence they are called immovable. They are also called untimely liberated (asamayavimukta). They enter meditative concentration whenever they wish and therefore attain liberation without depending upon a suitable occasion (samaya).

Samaya also means “time.” This means that the first five kinds of arhat may still fall away from this liberation (vimukti), and thus they are “liberated for a time” (kālātara, temporarily liberated), whereas the sixth kind no longer falls away and is liberated forever (atyanvimukti); hence they are called untimely liberated.

These arhats arise from those attained through view (dṛṣṭiprāpta).

(Question) Do these six kinds of arhat possess these dispositions (gotra) from the beginning, or do they acquire them only later?

The stanza answers:

[In some cases they are attained from the beginning;

In some cases they are attained after refining the faculties.]

Commentary: In some cases, one is an arhat intent upon dying (cetanādharman) from the beginning. In other cases, after having been an arhat subject to falling away, one must purify or perfect (uttāpana) the faculties before becoming one intent upon dying. The progression continues in this manner.

⁽¹⁾ An arhat subject to falling away is an arhat who may still fall away and is not one intent upon dying, and so forth, nor one capable of penetration (prativedhanādharman).

⁽²⁾ An arhat intent upon dying is an arhat who must still bring his existence to an end (cetayitum), and is not one who preserves the attainment (anurakṣaṇādharman), and so forth.

⁽³⁾ An arhat who preserves the attainment is an arhat who must still guard against falling away.

⁽⁴⁾ An arhat who abides securely is an arhat who remains unshaken when powerful causes of falling away are absent, even without safeguarding the attainment; that is, he continues to abide in the fruit. Such arhats do not progress further (vardhayitum), because they neither fall away nor undertake preparatory effort (abhiyoga).

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

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

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

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

However, if it is assumed that an arhat subject to falling away is one who necessarily falls away, and so forth, and that an arhat capable of penetration necessarily penetrates to the higher state, then the preceding conclusion must be modified: ⁽¹⁾ all six kinds of arhat exist in the Desire Realm; ⁽²⁾ in the higher realms there are only the two kinds—the securely abiding and the immovable—because there is: (a) no falling away (parihāṇi), and therefore no arhat subject to falling away and no arhat who preserves the attainment, since there is no need to guard against the loss of attainment; (b) no intention to die (cetanā), and therefore no arhat intent upon dying;

and (c) no perfecting of the faculties, and therefore no arhat capable of penetration, since such arhats must train their faculties until they become extremely sharp before they can “penetrate to” and become immovable arhats.

(Question) Among the first five kinds, which fall away from their disposition, and which fall away from the fruit?

The stanza answers:

[Four kinds fall away from their disposition;

Five kinds fall away from the fruit; there is no falling away from the first disposition or fruit.]

Commentary: Four kinds of arhat—from one intent upon dying through one capable of penetration—fall away from their disposition; five kinds of arhat—from one subject to falling away through one capable of penetration—also fall away from the fruit.

However, there is no falling away from the first disposition or the first fruit:

⁽¹⁾ An arhat noble one does not fall away from his original disposition, that is, the disposition acquired before becoming an arhat, because this disposition has been made firm (dṛḍhīkṛta) by the path of the trainee and the path beyond training. A noble trainee does not fall away from his original disposition, because this disposition has been made firm by both the mundane and supramundane paths. It is possible, however, to fall away from a disposition acquired through the refinement of the faculties (uttāpanāgatāt tu parihīyate).

⁽²⁾ A noble one does not fall away from the first fruit attained, but may fall away from the other fruits. Thus, one does not fall away from the fruit of stream-entry.

According to the two principles above, there are: ⁽¹⁾ three possible cases for an arhat of the Regressible type: he may attain nirvana while retaining his own spiritual disposition (abiding in his own state and entering nirvana), he may perfect his faculties (advance his faculties), or he may regress and return to the state of a trainee (regress and abide in the state of training); ⁽²⁾ four possible cases for an arhat of the Self-Minding type: the same three cases as above, together with the possibility of regressing and returning to the Regressible type of arhat;

⁽³⁾ and, successively, five, six, and seven possible cases for arhats of the Guarding, Steadfast, and Capable-of-Progress types, respectively (that is, with the additional possibilities of returning to the Self-Minding type of arhat, 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. If this were not so, then upon attaining a higher disposition, a noble one ought only to advance and never regress.

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

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

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

(Answer) No. Their objects are still the truths; they still contemplate the appropriated skandhas 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) In what respect 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 notion of self (ātmadṛṣṭi) mistakenly clings to real dharmas such as form (rūpa), and so forth—which are not a “self” and do not bear the characteristic of self—as though they possessed the modes of an entity that acts and experiences, or the modes of a Great Lord (Īśvara). Other kinds of views, such as the view that clings to extremes (antagrāhadṛṣṭi), and so forth, also arise by taking this very characteristic of selfhood (ātmatva) as their basis.

Thus, their basis is unreal (afflictions based on a nonexistent entity), which means that they have no basis. By contrast, afflictions other than those abandoned through seeing—namely, the afflictions abandoned by the Path of Cultivation (bhāvanā), such as craving, hatred, conceit, and doubt—have the nature of attachment, aversion, satisfaction, 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 there is not the slightest trace of a self, what belongs to a self, a Great Lord, and so forth.

Another explanation holds that the afflictions abandoned through cultivation have a determinate basis (pratiniyata), possessing a clearly defined character such as agreeableness, disagreeableness, 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), the afflictions abandoned through cultivation may arise through a lapse of mindfulness; but these afflictions cannot arise in a noble one who examines. It is like mistaking a rope for a snake when one does not examine it carefully (Vibhāṣā, 8, 1); [similarly, when attention is lacking, one forgets the metaphysical nature of agreeable things—that they are impermanent, suffering, and so forth]. By contrast, the error of the view of self cannot arise even in noble ones who do not examine, because this false view is solely a product of deliberation (saṃtīrakatvāt).

Thus, noble ones cannot regress from the abandonment of the afflictions that they have eliminated through the Path of Seeing (the noble abandonment through seeing).

The Sautrāntika masters say that a noble one can no longer regress from the fruit of arhatship. Their position is correct on the grounds of both scriptural testimony and reasoning.

1. Scriptural testimony:

The sutra (Madhyamāgama, 23, 12; Saṃyutta, iv, 25) says: “Bhikṣus, 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 did not say this of arhats.

It is true 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 regresses, it is only a regression from dwelling happily in the present life (dṛṣṭadharmasukhavihāra): “Regarding the immovable liberation of mind (akopyā cetovimukti), [a liberation] directly realized through the body, I declare that there is certainly no regression from it.”

But the Vibhāṣā responds that the Blessed One said only that there is no regression from the immovable liberation of mind; consequently, regression remains possible when this liberation is temporary (sāmayikī). We agree that regression from a temporary liberation of mind is possible. But what is this liberation? Is it, as you think, the fruit of arhatship (the nature of the worthy fruit)? And is it not reasonable to believe that, in speaking of “temporary liberation,” the Blessed One intended the mundane stages of dhyāna?

The type of meditative concentration that includes the fundamental dhyānas, when attained under certain conditions—for example, in a place free from noise, and so forth—is still called “temporary liberation” (sāmayikī, liberation dependent upon occasion). It is also called “agreeable liberation” (kāntā, cherished liberation), because whenever one loses it, one still longs to regain it (kāmanīya) in order to enjoy the blissful states of the present life (dṛṣṭadharmasukhavihāra). Another master (Bhadanta Rāma) says that this type of meditative concentration is called “temporary liberation” because, being contaminated, it belongs to the class of dharmas that “remain objects of desire.”

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

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

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

(Answer) The first has not brought the faculties to perfection (anuttāpanāgata): these faculties were keen from the outset. The third has brought the faculties to perfection. Neither of these two falls away from the distinctive meditative attainments (samādhiviśeṣa) already attained. The second no longer falls away from the qualities in which he abides, but he cannot arouse other distinctive qualities (guṇaviśeṣa), or, if he does arouse them, he may still be shaken (tasmāt tu kampate). This is the difference among these three kinds of noble ones.

(Question) Nevertheless, in the case of the Venerable 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 savoring experience (āsvādanā) and dull faculties, Godhika repeatedly fell away from temporary liberation. Out of dismay (saṃvega), Godhika took his own life with a knife. Because he had no attachment to body or 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): the temporally cherished liberation of mind. There is one dharma that should be realized: the immovable liberation of mind.”

If the temporally cherished liberation of mind is a quality of an arhat and this quality is therefore of two kinds, why, among the scriptures, does only the Daśottara Sutra mention this same kind of quality twice under two different names? Moreover, no sutra says that “the quality of an arhat should be produced”; it says only that “the quality of an arhat should be realized.”

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

Therefore, temporary liberation is not a quality of an arhat.

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

(Answer) This is the case of an arhat who, because his faculties are dull, must depend upon suitable occasions connected with the manifestation of meditative concentration. The opposite is an arhat who is “liberated independently 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 yet been fully comprehended (prajñāta) or eliminated; ⁽²⁾ dharmas favorable to the outbreak of sensual desire become manifest; ⁽³⁾ there is improper 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), [whereas there are cases in which sensual desire arises without all the causes being present (aparipūrṇakāraṇa), merely through the power of an external object (viṣaya)]? Yet what dharma could arise without the complete set of its causes?

2. Logical proof:

In an arhat, dharmas that counteract (pratipakṣa) the afflictions arise, and by the very nature of these dharmas the afflictions are brought into “a state of absolute incapacity to arise,” becoming 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 continue to exist in an arhat in the form of seeds, and that these constitute seeds of afflictions not yet completely uprooted forever? If so, how can an arhat be said to have exhausted all the contaminations (kṣīṇāsrava)? And if he has not exhausted the contaminations, 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 (Angārakarṣūpama).

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 way (evaṃ carata evaṃ viharatas), unwholesome states of mind may still occasionally arise through a lapse of mindfulness.” 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 detachment from the afflictions....

His mind inclines toward nirvana.” From other sutras (Aṅguttara, iv. 224; Saṃyukta, 26, 23), we also know that such qualities as “inclining the mind toward detachment,” and so forth, constitute one of the powers of an arhat. This power is further affirmed by the scriptural statement: “His mind has become cool (śīlībhūta) and cleansed (vāntībhūta) with respect to all dharmas that serve as a refuge for the contaminations.”

We reply: It is true that the sutras say this. Nevertheless, the Discourse on the Simile of the Charcoal Pit refers to trainees, not arhats. Indeed, it is only of a trainee that the sutra says: “So long as the modes of conduct of the bhikṣus (cāra) have not yet been thoroughly understood, afflictions may occasionally arise in him even while he is conducting himself in this way.”

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

(Question) Is it only arhats who possess these six kinds of spiritual disposition, or do other noble ones possess them as well? If they do, can they cultivate their faculties?

The stanza replies:

[Trainees and ordinary beings also possess the six kinds;

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

Explanation: Trainees and ordinary beings also possess these six spiritual dispositions. The spiritual dispositions of arhats likewise 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 period the practitioner cannot undertake the preparatory practice necessary for perfecting the faculties.

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

A scripture 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 unshakable liberation of mind realized by a noble one, I declare that it is absolutely impossible to fall away from this liberation of mind.”

How does an arhat 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.]

Treatise: There are three cases of falling away:

Falling away from the acquisition of an excellent quality (guṇa) means falling away from what has been attained (falling away from the attained).

Not attaining an excellent quality means falling away from what has not yet been attained (falling away from the unattained).

Failing to bring into manifestation an excellent quality already attained means falling away from enjoyment (upabhoga).

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

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

The masters who do not accept falling away (aparihāṇivādin, proponents of non-regression) say: “The uncontaminated liberation of all arhats is unshakable. But those of the Unshakable Dharma have been defined as we stated above; therefore, one cannot raise the objection: How do those of the Unshakable Dharma fall away from the pleasant abidings?”

(Question) When a noble one falls away from the fruit of arhatship, will that noble one be reborn? After falling away, does that person do what was not done while abiding in the fruit?

The stanza answers:

[Certainly, while falling away from the fruit,

One cannot die;

What one did not do while abiding in the fruit,

One likewise does not do, because moral shame has increased.]

Treatise: A noble one never dies while in the process of falling away from the fruit. The scripture states: “Bhikshus, a learned noble disciple may lose right mindfulness, and that disciple’s mindfulness may become sluggish. Nevertheless, that disciple can swiftly cast off, cause to disappear, destroy, and eliminate [this lapse of mindfulness].”

If this were not so, and a person who had become an arhat but then lost the fruit could still continue transmigrating through the cycle of birth and death, then the holy life (brahmacarya) could no longer inspire confidence in sentient beings (anāśvāsika).

A person who has fallen away from the fruit does not do the things that one abiding in the fruit could not do. Even after falling away, that person will not do anything contrary to the fruit, namely acts of unchastity (abrahmacarya). This is like a valiant warrior who may stumble but cannot fall (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-established habit; one still in training has only one;

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

Those beyond training depend upon nine grounds,

Those still in training upon only six grounds,

Because they relinquish a fruit and the Path of Excellence,

And attain only the path of a fruit.]

Treatise: Those whose nature is capable of realization (prativedhanādharman), when perfecting their faculties and entering the spiritual lineage of those of the Unshakable Dharma, must give rise to nine Uninterrupted Paths (ānantaryamārgas) and nine Paths of Liberation (vimuktamārgas), exactly as those still in training who attain the fruit of arhatship [must become detached from the summit of existence].

(Question) Why is this so?

(Answer) Because those whose nature is capable of realization have become deeply accustomed (abhyasta) to the spiritual lineage of those with dull faculties, they cannot transform this lineage without intense effort. Indeed, this lineage has been firmly established by both the path of training and the path beyond training.

One of the type liberated through faith (Śraddhādhimukta), when transforming the faculties in order to become one who has attained through view (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 non-concentrated 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 in other realms because there is no falling away there.

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

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

Those still in training depend upon six grounds, that is, excluding the three formless absorptions.

(Question) Why?

(Answer) When those still in training perfect their faculties, they relinquish a fruit (sakṛdāgāmiphala), namely the fruit attained by means of the path associated with dull faculties. They relinquish the Path of Excellence (viśeṣa), namely the progress they had attained—the Path of Preparation, the Uninterrupted Path, the Path of Liberation, and the Path of Excellence—while becoming detached from the dhyanas, for that progress had been realized through dull faculties. They attain only a single fruit belonging to the lineage of sharp faculties, a fruit that forms part of detachment from the Desire Realm, and not the fruit of non-returning, which belongs to the Formless Realm.

Because arhats have faculties that are entirely different, there are as many as nine grounds for them.

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

The stanza answers:

[Seven kinds of shravakas and two Buddhas,

Differentiated by nine grades of faculties.]

Treatise: There are seven kinds of shravakas: the five kinds beginning with those of the Dharma of Regression, together with those of the Unshakable Dharma; the latter are divided into two kinds according to whether the arhat originally belonged to the unshakable lineage or attained this lineage through perfecting the faculties.

The two Buddhas—the Pratyekabuddha (Solitary Buddha) and the Buddha (Perfectly Awakened One)—both belong to the unshakable class.

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

In general, all noble ones belong to one of seven kinds: ⁽¹⁾ a follower through faith (Śraddhānusārin), ⁽²⁾ a follower through Dharma (Dharmānusārin), ⁽³⁾ one liberated through faith (Śraddhādhimukta), ⁽⁴⁾ one who has attained through view (Dṛṣṭprāpta), ⁽⁵⁾ a body-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 Absorption 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 Dharma-Follower. At first, while still at the stage of an ordinary being, owing to faith (śraddhā), the first type, when prompted by others (parapratyayena, meaning that he hears from others the “meaning” of the smṛtyupasthānas, etc.), directs his attention (prayoga) to the objects (artheṣu), that is, he applies himself to reflection and cultivation (cintābhāvanāsevanāt). The second type applies himself in the same way, but follows (anusāra) the Dharma, namely the teaching concerning the twelve divisions, by personally following (anusarati) the dharmas, namely the factors conducive to awakening (bodhipākṣikas, etc.).

⁽²⁾ By faculties, as in the cases of the Faith-Resolved and the 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 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 Body-Witness, because this type has attained the attainment of cessation (nirodhasamāpatti).

4. By liberation, as in the case of the Wisdom-Liberated.

5. By meditative attainment and liberation, as in the case of the Liberated in Both Ways.

Thus, considered in terms of names, there are seven types in all; but considered in terms of substantial reality (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 the Faith-Resolved and the One Who Has Attained through View, and on the Path Beyond Training they become the Temporarily Liberated and the Immutably Liberated.

The Faith-Follower is classified as follows: ⁽¹⁾ On the basis of faculties, he is divided into three types. Although his faculties are naturally dull, they belong respectively to the three grades of inferior-inferior, inferior-intermediate, and inferior-superior. ⁽²⁾ On the basis of disposition, he is divided into five types: one subject to regression, and so forth. ⁽³⁾ On the basis of the path, he is divided into fifteen types, according to whether he is abiding in one of the eight receptivities or seven knowledges. ⁽⁴⁾ On the basis of detachment, he is divided into seventy-three types: the first remains bound by every kind of bondage in the Desire Realm (sakalabandhana, completely bound); the next nine have relinquished from one through nine groups of bondage in the Desire Realm;

the next nine have relinquished from one through nine groups of bondage in the first dhyāna; and this continues in the same manner up to the Sphere of Nothingness (ākiṃcanya).

Eight times nine—comprising detachment pertaining to the Desire Realm, the four dhyānas, and the three attainments of the Formless Realm—makes seventy-two types; adding the “completely bound” type gives seventy-three. ⁽⁵⁾ On the basis of the supporting body (āśraya), he is divided into nine types: one born on any of the three continents (dvīpas), excluding the northern continent of Uttarakuru; or one born in any 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 distinctions stated above, there are altogether 147825 types of Faith-Follower. The Dharma-Follower and the others are calculated in the same manner.

(Question) Why are they called the Liberated in Both Ways and the Wisdom-Liberated?

The stanza answers:

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

The remaining case is the Wisdom-Liberated.]

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), he is liberated from the obstruction of afflictions (kleśavaraṇa) and the obstruction to liberation (vimokṣavaraṇa).

The Blessed One said: “One who has abandoned the five afflictions in this world and is no longer subject to regression is 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: Fully accomplished trainees are of three kinds: accomplished in fruit, in faculties, and in meditative attainment.

One accomplished only in fruit is a non-returner of the Faith-Resolved type, but not a Body-Witness, for he 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 Body-Witness.

One accomplished in fruit and meditative attainment is a non-returner of the Faith-Resolved type who is also a Body-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 Body-Witness.

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

One beyond training is 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.

The Wisdom-Liberated (prajñāvimukta) of the immutably liberated type is accomplished by faculties.

The Liberated in Both Ways (ubhayatobhāgavimukta) of the temporarily liberated type is accomplished by meditative attainment.

The Liberated in Both Ways of the immutably liberated type is accomplished by faculties and meditative attainment.

(Question) Previously, numerous 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 Beyond Training (aśaikṣa), the Preparatory Path (prayoga), the Uninterrupted Path (ānantarya), the Path of Liberation (vimukti), and the Path of Excellence (viśeṣamārga). In brief, how many principal paths are there?

The stanza answers:

[It should be known that all paths,

In brief, are only four:

The Preparatory Path, the Uninterrupted Path,

The Path of Liberation, and the Path of Excellence.]

Treatise: The Preparatory Path—the path of application or preliminary training—is the path by virtue of which the subsequent Uninterrupted Path can arise in succession.

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

The Path of Liberation—the path of deliverance—is the first path to arise free from the bondage of the obstructions abandoned by the Uninterrupted Path.

The Path of Excellence—the most distinguished path—is any path other than 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 through it nirvana is attained.

(Question) How can the Path of Liberation and the Path of Excellence be called “paths” when the attainment of nirvana depends only upon the Preparatory Path and the Uninterrupted Path?

(Answer) Because the Path of Liberation and the Path of Excellence resemble the path of abandonment (prahāṇamārga = ānantarya) with respect to their objects, namely the Four Noble Truths; their aspects, namely impermanence and so forth; and their purity (anāsrava). They are distinguished by their supreme character (adhimātratara), because their causes comprise all the causes of the other “paths of abandonment,” together with those very “paths of abandonment” themselves. Furthermore, it is precisely through these two kinds of path that one progressively attains other, higher paths: [a Path of Liberation is necessary in order to attain a new Uninterrupted Path]. Alternatively, it is because through these two kinds of path one can enter nirvana without remainder.

The path is also called a course of practice (pratipad, progress), because by means of this course one proceeds to 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 dhyānas;

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—that are cultivated on the basis of the stages of dhyāna—that is, while the practitioner abides in those stages—constitute the pleasant course of practice (sukhā pratipad, pleasant progress). This is because these stages of dhyāna possess all their factors and a perfect balance between calm abiding (śamatha) and insight (vipaśyanā); therefore, in the dhyānas this course proceeds without requiring any exertion.

The path in the preliminary stage, the intermediate dhyāna, and the concentrations of the Formless Realm constitutes the painful course of practice (duḥkhā pratipad, painful progress), because these concentrations do not possess all the factors and lack a balance between calm abiding and insight. In the preliminary stage and the intermediate dhyāna (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 the direct knowledge (abhijñā), or wisdom (prajñā), associated with this course is slow (dhandhā abhijñāsyām). “Direct knowledge” is synonymous with wisdom, and “slow” (dhanda) is synonymous with “dull” (manda). The course is called “swift comprehension” when the direct knowledge associated with it is swift, that is, when wisdom becomes very keen with respect to this course.

Alternatively, it may be explained thus: The direct knowledge of a dull-minded person is slow…; the direct knowledge of a sharp-minded person is swift.

The path is also called the dharmas 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 accord with these knowledges, they are called factors.]

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

The knowledge of exhaustion (kṣayajñāna) and the knowledge of non-arising (anutpādajñāna) are themselves awakening (bodhi). Owing to 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 perfect awakening (anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi). Indeed, through these two kinds of knowledge, ignorance is completely eliminated (aśeṣāvidyāprahāṇāt); 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 again have to be completed.

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

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

The stanza answers:

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

Wisdom, effort, concentration, faith,

Mindfulness, joy, equanimity, pliancy,

Morality, and thought.]

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

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

i. Thus, first there are five entities: faith, effort, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom. Under their own respective names, these five entities constitute the five faculties and the five powers.

Among these five entities, wisdom 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 path factors (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 path factors (mārgāṅga), namely, right effort (samyagvyāyāma).

Concentration constitutes: (a) the four bases of supernatural power; (b) one of the factors of awakening, namely, the awakening factor of concentration (samādhisaṃbodhyaṅga); and (c) one of the path factors, 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 path factors, namely, right mindfulness (samyaksmṛti).

ii. Apart from the first five entities mentioned above, what other entities are there?—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 path factors 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, when these two entities belonging to morality (śīla) are added to the preceding nine, there are eleven.

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

The stanza answers:

[The four establishments of mindfulness, four right efforts,

And four bases of supernatural power are said,

According to their predominant quality, to be wisdom, effort, and concentration;

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

Exposition: This is said with reference to the principal factor (yathāpradhānam) of the establishments of mindfulness and so forth; nevertheless, all these factors of awakening are also common collections 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 correctly exercised (pradhīyante).

(Question) Why is concentration called a base of supernatural power?

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

However, some masters (Vaibhāṣikas) maintain that “supernatural power” is concentration itself, while the four dharmas of aspiration (chanda), mind (citta), effort (vīrya), and investigation (mīmāṃsā) are the “bases” or “feet” of this “supernatural power.” If so, it would have to be said that there are as many as thirteen entities among the factors of awakening, since aspiration and mind would have to be added. Moreover, to maintain that “supernatural power” is concentration contradicts the sūtras. The sūtra (Mahāvyutpatti, 15; Aṅguttara, iii. 280; Dīgha, i. 77) says: “What is supernatural 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 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 the 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 truly are—arises.

(Question) At which stages are the various factors of enlightenment established and become principal elements?

The stanza answers:

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

The path of cultivation, and the path of seeing,

The seven groups—establishments of mindfulness, and so forth—

Increase in this order.]

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

At the stage of warmth (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 spiritual power, because through these bases of spiritual power the wholesome roots are preserved from regression.

At the stage of patience (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 overcome by the afflictions—which are unable to become manifest—or by other mundane dharmas.

At the stage of the path of cultivation (bhāvanāmārga) are the factors of enlightenment, because this path is close to enlightenment (bodhyāsanna), that is, to the two kinds of knowledge, the knowledge of exhaustion and the 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 proceeding onward (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 enlightenment (bhāvanāmārga) first and the factors of the path (darśanamārga) afterward in order to establish an order corresponding to the number of factors: first seven factors, and then eight. Investigation of dharmas (dharmapravicaya) is both enlightenment and a factor of enlightenment; right view is both the path and a factor of the path. (Vibhāṣā, 141, 9).

The foregoing is the position of the Vaibhāṣikas.

Other masters have demonstrated the order (ānupūrvi) of the factors conducive to enlightenment (bodhipakṣyas) without disturbing 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 dispersed among all the many different kinds of 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 have craving as their basis (gardhāśritānāṃ smarasaṃkalpānām).” (Madhyama, 51, 20).

⁽²⁾ Second is effort: Effort increases through the power of the establishments of mindfulness and through controlling and directing (pradhāna) the mind so as to accomplish four tasks: abandoning unwholesome dharmas that have already 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 spiritual power arise and are realized (prabhāvyante).

⁽⁴⁾ Through reliance on concentration, faith, effort, and so forth become predominant conditions (adhipatibhūta) for supramundane dharmas (lokottaradharmas); they bring these dharmas forth (tadāvāhakatvāt), and these are the faculties.

⁽⁵⁾ These same kinds of faith, effort, and so forth, when they subdue the manifestation of the dharmas opposed to them (nirjitavipakṣasamudācāra), are the powers.

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

⁽⁷⁾ At both the path of seeing and the path of cultivation are also the factors of the path. 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 enlightenment are brought to perfection through cultivation.”

The sutra also says: “Bhikshus, when it is said, ‘Speak the truth—speak of things as they truly are,’ this refers to the Four Noble Truths. Bhikshus, when it is said, ‘Proceed upon the path that has been understood,’ this refers to the Noble Eightfold Path.”

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

(Question) Among the “dharmas conducive to enlightenment” (bodhipākṣikadharma), how many are contaminated and how many are uncontaminated?

The stanza answers:

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

Are all uncontaminated;

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

Are each of both kinds.]

Treatise: The factors of enlightenment and the factors of the path are all uncontaminated in nature because they belong to 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 enlightenment may be either contaminated or uncontaminated.

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

The stanza answers:

[In the first dhyāna, all are present;

In the preparatory stage, except the factor of joy;

In the second dhyāna, except initial application of thought;

In the third, fourth, and intermediate dhyānas, both are absent;

In the first three planes of the Formless Realm,

The factors of morality and the two above are absent;

In the Desire Realm and the summit of existence,

The factors of enlightenment and the factors of the path are absent.]

Treatise: In the first dhyāna, all thirty-seven dharmas are present.

In the preparatory stage, joy (prīti) is absent.

(Question) Why is the factor of enlightenment called joy absent from the preparatory stage?

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

In the second dhyāna, the factor of the path called right intention (saṃkalpa) is absent, and only thirty-six factors conducive to enlightenment remain. Right intention is absent because there is no initial application of thought (vicāra) there.

In the third and fourth dhyānas, joy and right intention are absent, and only thirty-five factors conducive to enlightenment remain.

In the intermediate dhyāna there are likewise thirty-five factors conducive to enlightenment; that is, joy and right intention are also excluded.

In the first three formless concentrations, the three factors of morality—right speech, right action, and right livelihood—are absent, as are joy and right intention; thus, each concentration has only thirty-two factors conducive to enlightenment.

In the Desire Realm and at the summit of existence, the factors of enlightenment and the factors of the path are absent because there is no uncontaminated path in these two places. Thus, only twenty-two factors conducive to enlightenment remain in each plane.

(Question) When does a practitioner cultivating the factors of enlightenment attain verified purity (avetyaprasādas)—that is, the four kinds of faith and purity accompanied by wisdom?

The stanza answers:

[Verified purity is of four kinds:

In the Buddha, Dharma, Sangha, and morality.

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

On seeing the truth of the path, one additionally attains verified purity in the Buddha and Sangha.

The Dharma comprises all three truths

And the paths of the bodhisattva and the Pratyekabuddha.

Faith and morality constitute their essence.

All four kinds are uncontaminated.]

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

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

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

(Question) In the phrase “verified purity relating to the Dharma,” how should the word Dharma be understood?

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

Thus, considered in terms of designation, there are four different kinds of “purity” (prasāda), owing to the diversity of the objects on which purity is focused.

Considered in terms of substance, all four kinds of purity mentioned above consist of only two things: faith and precepts.

The verified purities relating to the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha have faith (śraddhā) as their nature. The precepts cherished by the noble ones have morality (śīla) as their nature. Therefore, 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 become manifest (saṃmukhīkaroti) upon emerging from contemplation (vyutthita).

(Question) How can they become manifest upon emerging from contemplation?

(Answer) By saying: “Ah! The Blessed One is completely awakened! The true Dharma and Vinaya have been so clearly taught! The noble Sangha (śrāvakasaṃgha) practices rightly!” By saying this, one causes the kinds of verified purity to become manifest, because the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha are respectively the physician, the medicine, and the attendant caring for the sick.

Because the purity of the precepts arises from purity of mind, this purity is called the fourth, that is, the last: only when the mind possesses such faith (prasanna) does the practitioner attain the precepts cherished by the noble ones. Alternatively, purity of the precepts is mentioned last because, if the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha are regarded respectively as the physician, the medicine, and the attendant caring for the sick, then purity of the precepts should be regarded as health (āroga). Or the Buddha is the guide, the Dharma is the road, the Sangha is the traveling merchant, and the precepts of the noble ones are the vehicle.

The sutra states that one in training possesses eight factors (aṅga), namely, the eight factors of the noble path (mārgāṅga) belonging to those in training; and that one beyond training possesses ten factors, namely, the eight factors of the noble path belonging to those beyond training, together with the two additional factors of the right liberation of one beyond training (aśaikṣī samyagvimukti) [that is, the perfect liberation of an arhat] and the right knowledge of one 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 in relation 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 respectively resolve and cessation through discernment.

Conditioned liberation is a factor of one beyond training,

And, being twofold, constitutes the skandha of liberation.

Right knowledge is like what was stated concerning awakening:

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

Treatise: Those in training remain bound because they still possess the bonds of the afflictions. How, then, could one in training be regarded as liberated? A person who has relinquished only some of the bonds cannot be called liberated. Since liberation is not yet present in such a person, that person also 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 resolve (adhimokṣa) of those beyond training is conditioned liberation. It is conditioned liberation that is called a factor of one 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) [freedom from craving (rāgavirāgāt) is liberation of mind; freedom from ignorance (avidyāvirāgāt) is liberation through wisdom]. Conditioned liberation also constitutes what is called the skandha of liberation (vimuktiskandha).

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

The above passage shows that resolve does not constitute liberation. This liberation must be the purity (vaimalya = anāsravatva) of mind arising from the abandonment of the afflictions of craving (rāga) and so forth, that is, the afflictions eliminated by correct knowledge (tattvajñāna, knowledge of reality).

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 precisely right knowledge, the tenth factor of those beyond training.

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

The stanza answers:

[The mind of one beyond training, when arising,

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 of one beyond training. At the moment of the vajra-like samādhi (Vajropamasamādhi), this possession is abandoned; the mind of one beyond training then arises and is liberated. Once this possession has been abandoned, the mind of one beyond training has arisen and has been liberated.

(Question) What, then, of the mind of one 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 also 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 still in training; why is it not said that this mind is also liberated?

(Answer) The mundane mind of those still in training is not like the mundane mind of those beyond training, because among 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 other than 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 relies 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 the afflictions;

Because their respective scopes differ in breadth,

They are established as a fourfold alternative.]

Treatise: Only by means of 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 by means of 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 the afflictions, are also precisely the patiences and knowledges upon which the practitioner relies to attain dispassion.

Thus, there are altogether four cases:

⁽¹⁾ There is disenchantment but not dispassion: With the patiences and knowledges concerning suffering and origin, if the practitioner does not eliminate the afflictions, the practitioner attains only disenchantment, because these patiences and knowledges take only conditions conducive to disenchantment as their objects.

⁽²⁾ There is dispassion but not disenchantment: With the patiences and knowledges concerning cessation and the path, the practitioner eliminates the afflictions and therefore attains only dispassion. These patiences and knowledges take only conditions of delight as their objects (nirvedavastu, objects of disenchantment).

⁽³⁾ There is both disenchantment and dispassion: With the patiences and knowledges concerning suffering and origin by which the practitioner eliminates the afflictions, the practitioner attains both dispassion and disenchantment.

⁽⁴⁾ There is neither disenchantment nor dispassion: With the patiences and knowledges concerning cessation and the path, if the practitioner does not eliminate the 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 the afflictions by means of the patiences of Dharma knowledge (dharmajñānakṣāntis) or the knowledges of Dharma (dharmajñānas). Nor does the practitioner eliminate the afflictions by means of the knowledges that form part of the paths of preparatory practice, liberation, and further progress.