成唯識論

XII. ESTABLISHING THE TEN CAUSES ON THE BASIS OF THE FIFTEEN SUPPORTING BASES

The four conditions are thus differentiated into ten causes because of differences in meaning among the fifteen supporting bases.

How are the ten causes established on the basis of the fifteen supporting bases?

1. The supporting basis of speech — This refers to the various utterances that arise, taking dharmas, names, and concepts as their intrinsic nature, or supporting basis. It is precisely on the basis of such speech that the Cause of Expression in Accordance with Speech is established. That is, relying upon these dharmas, names, and concepts, one expresses meanings according to what has been seen, heard, understood, or known. Here, that which expresses—the language—is the cause of that which is expressed—the meanings.

One treatise holds that the Cause of Expression in Accordance with Speech takes names, concepts, and views as its supporting basis. Because one apprehends a characteristic in accordance with its name, clings to that characteristic through a view, and then gives rise to speech accordingly, if one follows that Compendium Treatise, names, concepts, and views are shown to be the causes of speech; this is called the supporting basis of speech.

2. The supporting basis of reception — This refers to examining the relationship between that which is capable of receiving and that which is received. It is precisely on this basis that the Cause of Consideration is established. That is, one examines how dependence upon or relation to one thing causes another either to arise, remain, be accomplished, or be attained; the former is the Cause of Consideration for the latter.

3. The supporting basis of habitual tendencies — This refers to the seeds within consciousness and the seeds in external objects while they are still immature. It is precisely on this basis that the Cause of Attraction is established. An immature seed can draw forth its own fruit in the distant future and is therefore called the Cause of Attraction.

4. The supporting basis of moistened seeds — This refers to seeds within or outside the body when they have reached maturity. It is precisely on this basis that the Cause of Arising is established; that is, a mature seed can produce its own proximate fruit.

5. The supporting basis of immediate cessation — This is the immediately antecedent condition of mind and mental factors.

6. The supporting basis of the cognitive object — This is the object-condition of mind and mental factors.

7. The supporting basis of the faculties — This refers to the six faculties, which are the supports of mind and mental factors.

8. The supporting basis of activity — This refers to the activities of karma, such as the act of felling a tree, and to the activity of an implement, such as an axe having the function of felling a tree. Apart from seeds, all presently existing contributing conditions constitute this supporting basis of activity.

9. The supporting basis of personal agency — This refers to the activity of an agent in relation to the task performed. Apart from seeds, all presently existing contributing conditions constitute this supporting basis of personal agency.

10. The supporting basis of true vision — This is uncontaminated vision. Apart from producing its own seeds, all other capacities that assist in bringing about realization of uncontaminated dharmas belong to this supporting basis.

On the collective basis of the six supporting bases from the fifth through the tenth above, the Cause of Assistance is established. That is, assistance by five of them brings about contaminated dharmas, while assistance by all six brings about uncontaminated dharmas.

11. The supporting basis of concordance — This refers to neutral, wholesome, or defiled formations, whether seeds or manifest activities, all of which are capable of concordantly inducing dharmas of the same kind that are superior to those preceding them. It is precisely on this basis that the Cause of Inducement is established. That is, it can induce superior practices of the same kind and lead to unconditioned dharmas.

12. The supporting basis of differentiated functions — This refers to the fact that each conditioned material or mental dharma possesses, in relation to its own fruit, a power capable of producing its own fruit and a distinct realization without confusion. It is precisely on this basis that the Cause of Determinate Difference is established. That is, it is capable of producing fruits within its own realm and of enabling realization of the fruition belonging to its own Vehicle and teaching.

14. The supporting basis of obstruction — This is that which can obstruct arising, remaining, accomplishment, or attainment. It is precisely on this basis that the Cause of Opposition is established. That is, it can oppose the processes of arising, remaining, accomplishment, and attainment.

15. The supporting basis of non-obstruction — This is that which does not obstruct arising, remaining, accomplishment, or attainment. It is precisely on this basis that the Cause of Non-Opposition is established. That is, it does not oppose the processes of arising, remaining, accomplishment, and attainment.

These ten causes are subsumed under two causes: the Productive Cause and the Expedient Cause.

As stated in the Bodhisattva-bhumi of the Yogacara Treatise: “The attracting seeds and the arising seeds are collectively called the Productive Cause. All the remaining causes are collectively called the Expedient Cause.” Here, however, it is said that the seeds functioning as causes and conditions are included within six causes: Attraction, Arising, Inducement, Determinate Difference, Common Activity, and Non-Opposition.

While still at the immature stage, they are not called seeds functioning as causes and conditions but are called attracting seeds; when they have reached maturity, they are called arising seeds. This is because all the seeds functioning as causes and conditions within the six causes are included in these two stages of immaturity and maturity. Although manifest activity produces seeds, it is a Productive Cause, but not a seed functioning as a cause and condition.

Likewise, although the four causes of Attraction and so forth produce seeds, because their operation may be interrupted, the production of seeds by manifest activity is omitted from the summary and is not described as a cause and condition.

Alternatively, that which directly produces a fruit is also designated a seed. For example, when it is said that a presently existing rice seed produces a rice plant, it too is called a seed. As for the remaining causes—the second, the Cause of Consideration; the fifth, the Cause of Assistance; the ninth, the Cause of Opposition; together with those dharmas within the preceding six causes that are not causes and conditions—all are other than the seeds functioning as causes and conditions in the two stages before being moistened for production and after being moistened and matured.

They are therefore collectively called Expedient Causes. It is not the case that, in the Bodhisattva-bhumi, the two kinds of attracting and arising seeds that are causes and conditions are wholly confined to the Causes of Attraction and Arising among the ten causes, for the four Causes of Inducement, Determinate Difference, Common Activity, and Non-Opposition also contain seeds functioning as causes and conditions. Nor is it the case that only the eight causes mentioned there are called the remaining causes, because the two Causes of Attraction and Arising also contain portions that are not seeds functioning as causes and conditions.

At the stage with applied thought and sustained thought, it is said that the Cause of Arising is the Productive Cause and that all others are Expedient Causes. The meaning of this passage is that, among the six causes beginning with Attraction, whether manifest activities or seeds function as causes and conditions, they are all called Causes of Arising because they can directly produce fruits of the same kind as themselves.

All the other causes are included under the Expedient Cause rather than under the Cause of Arising. It is not the case that the Cause of Arising at this stage with applied thought and sustained thought is confined only to the Cause of Arising among the ten causes, for the five other causes—Attraction, Inducement, and so forth—also possess the nature of causes and conditions. Nor does the phrase “all the other causes” mean the nine causes other than the Cause of Arising, because the Cause of Arising itself contains a portion that is not a cause and condition.

Alternatively, according to the statement in the Bodhisattva-bhumi of the Yogacara Treatise, “The attracting seeds and arising seeds are the Causes of Attraction and Arising among those ten causes,” while the other eight among the ten causes are called the remaining causes. Although the Causes of Attraction and Arising contain portions that are not Productive Causes, because the seeds functioning as causes and conditions are most evident within them, they alone are specifically described as Productive Causes. And although the other causes contain portions that are not Expedient Causes, because their predominant power is greatest and most evident, they alone are specifically described as Expedient Causes.

At the stage with applied thought and sustained thought, it is said that the Cause of Arising is the Productive Cause, while all the remaining causes are called Expedient Causes. “Arising” refers precisely to that Cause of Arising, while “the other causes” refers to the other nine causes.

Within the Producing Cause, there is a portion that is not a seed as cause and condition; nevertheless, because it is the closest and most evident in relation to the fruit produced, it is specifically designated as a seed serving as cause and condition.

Although within the Impelling Cause there is a portion consisting of seeds as causes and conditions, because it is the most remote and concealed in relation to the fruit produced, it is not designated as a cause and condition. The other causes subsumed under Expedient Causes should be understood by analogy with the foregoing.

XIII. HOW THE FOUR CONDITIONS SUBSUME THE TEN CAUSES AND THE TWO CAUSES

– On what basis are the four conditions just mentioned established, and how do they completely subsume the ten causes and the two causes?

– The Treatise says: “The cause and condition is established on the basis of seeds. The immediately antecedent condition is established on the basis of the nature of ceasing without interruption. The object-condition is established on the basis of the object realm. The predominant condition is established on the basis of all that remains apart from those three conditions.”

Here, “seeds” specifically refers to the seeds serving as causes and conditions included within six of the fifteen bases stated above: latent impressions, seeds moistened for rebirth, conformity, differentiated efficacy, cooperation, and obstruction. Although the manifest activities of four bases—conformity, differentiated efficacy, cooperation, and non-obstruction—also contain a portion that serves as cause and condition, because such activity can be interrupted, it is omitted and not mentioned. Alternatively, manifest activity can also directly produce its own fruit, as with external glutinous-rice seed, and is therefore also called a seed.

Alternatively, it is said that “seeds” belong only to the fourth basis, the basis of seeds moistened for rebirth. They are included or excluded according to whether their character is direct or indirect, concealed or manifest, as explained above.

The references to the basis of ceasing without interruption and the basis of the object realm should be understood as generally indicating the bases of the two conditions: the immediately antecedent condition and the object-condition. It is not only the two bases of ceasing without interruption and the object realm that possess the meanings of the immediately antecedent condition and the object-condition; the other thirteen bases also possess the meanings of these two conditions. Alternatively, ceasing without interruption and the object realm refer only to the fifth and sixth bases. Although the other bases also possess them, they are omitted because they are concealed.

– The Treatise says: “The cause and condition is subsumed under the Productive Cause. The predominant condition is subsumed under the Expedient Cause. The immediately antecedent condition and the object-condition are subsumed under the Supporting Cause.” Although the Expedient Cause includes all three conditions—the immediately antecedent condition, the object-condition, and the predominant condition—the predominant condition is more prevalent and is therefore emphasized.

The other nine causes also include the immediately antecedent condition and the object-condition, but these two are more evidently subsumed under the Supporting Cause and are therefore emphasized. The reciprocal subsumption of the various kinds within the Productive Cause is as explained above.

XIV. THE FIVE FRUITS

– Since causes and conditions have been explained, there must certainly be fruits. How many fruits are there, and on which bases are they attained?

– There are five kinds of fruit:

1. Ripened Fruit – This is the ripened retributive body and the karmically neutral states born of ripening among sentient beings, which are brought about by wholesome contaminated dharmas and unwholesome dharmas.

2. Homogeneous Fruit – This is the subsequent fruit of the same kind produced by wholesome, unwholesome, or neutral seeds, or the subsequent fruit that proceeds in conformity with previous karma.

3. Fruit of Disconnection – This is the wholesome unconditioned Dharma realized when the uncontaminated path—uncontaminated wisdom—eliminates the two obstructions: the afflictive obstructions and the cognitive obstructions.

4. Fruit of Personal Effort – This is the result of an undertaking accomplished by agents through the use of instruments.

5. Predominant Fruit – These are the fruits attained apart from the four kinds listed above.

The Yogacarabhumi Treatise and other texts say: “Through the basis of latent impressions, the Ripened Fruit is attained. Through the basis of conformity, the Homogeneous Fruit is attained. Through the basis of the true path of seeing, the Fruit of Disconnection is attained. Through the basis of personal effort, the Fruit of Personal Effort is attained. Through all the remaining bases, the Predominant Fruit is attained.”

“The basis of latent impressions” indicates all the capacities of the bases that bring about the Ripened Fruit. “The basis of conformity” indicates all the capacities of the bases that lead to the Homogeneous Fruit. “The basis of the true path of seeing” indicates all the capacities of the bases that enable realization of the Fruit of Disconnection. “The basis of personal effort” indicates all the capacities of the bases that bring about the Fruit of Personal Effort. “All the remaining bases” indicates all the capacities of the bases that lead to the Predominant Fruit. Were this not so, the scope would be either too broad or too narrow.

Alternatively, “latent impressions” belong only to the third basis, the basis of latent impressions. Although the other bases also include causes through which ripening is attained, this basis of latent impressions also contains a portion that is not a cause of ripening. Nevertheless, just as the cause of ripening is very remote from the Ripened Fruit, so too are these latent impressions; therefore, they are specifically mentioned.

“Conformity” belongs only to the eleventh basis, the basis of conformity. Although the other bases also attain the Homogeneous Fruit, the basis of conformity also contains a portion that does not attain a Homogeneous Fruit. Nevertheless, because the homogeneous cause brings about powerful wholesome and unwholesome results and its mode of activity is evident, and because the basis of conformity is likewise, it is specifically mentioned.

“The true path of seeing” specifically indicates the tenth basis, the basis of the true path of seeing. Although the other bases also enable realization of the Fruit of Disconnection, this basis of the true path of seeing also attains fruits that are not fruits of disconnection. Nevertheless, because the characteristic of the basis of the true path of seeing realizing the Fruit of Disconnection is evident, it is specifically said that the basis of the true path of seeing attains the Fruit of Disconnection.

“The basis of personal effort” specifically indicates the ninth basis, the basis of personal effort. Although the other bases also attain the Fruit of Personal Effort, the basis of personal effort can also attain the Predominant Fruit and other fruits. Nevertheless, because its name and characteristic are evident, it is specifically said that the basis of personal effort attains the Fruit of Personal Effort.

“All the remaining bases” refers only to the other eleven bases. Although these eleven bases also attain other fruits, and although the other bases can likewise attain the Predominant Fruit, these eleven bases for the most part attain the Predominant Fruit. The other four bases have already been clearly shown to attain the other four fruits. Therefore, it is specifically said that these eleven bases attain the Predominant Fruit.

– Thus, among these five fruits, the Ripened Fruit is attained through five causes—the Impelling, Producing, Determining, Cooperative, and Non-Contradictory Causes—and through one condition, the predominant condition. The Homogeneous Fruit is attained through six causes—the Producing, Supporting, Inducing, Determining, Cooperative, and Non-Contradictory Causes—and through two conditions, the cause and condition and the predominant condition. The Fruit of Disconnection is attained through five causes—the Supporting, Inducing, Determining, Cooperative, and Non-Contradictory Causes—and through one condition, the predominant condition. Regarding the Fruit of Personal Effort, one opinion holds that it is attained through four causes—the Observational, Supporting, Cooperative, and Non-Contradictory Causes—and through one condition, the predominant condition. Another opinion holds that it is attained through seven causes—the Impelling, Producing, Supporting, Inducing, Determining, Cooperative, and Non-Contradictory Causes—and through three conditions: the cause and condition, the immediately antecedent condition, and the predominant condition. The Predominant Fruit may be attained through all ten causes and all four conditions.

XV. THE PRINCIPAL DISCUSSION OF DISCRIMINATIVE CONSCIOUSNESS ARISING THROUGH CONDITIONS

The ancillary matters have now been discussed; we shall proceed to the principal exposition. The seeds within the root consciousness fully serve as three conditions for the arising of the manifest discriminative activity of the eight consciousnesses, with the exception of the immediately antecedent condition. That is, the seeds directly produce the manifest activity of the eight consciousnesses; this is the cause and condition.

These seeds are also the object-condition for the perceiving aspects of the eight consciousnesses that apprehend them. If these seeds within consciousness possess the power to assist the manifest activity of those eight consciousnesses, or at least do not obstruct it, they constitute the predominant condition. The arising of the manifest activity of purified consciousness from purified seeds is likewise (seeds producing manifest activity).

The manifest activities of the eight consciousnesses, in their discriminating and reciprocal relations, can also fully serve as three conditions for one another, except the causal condition.

The consciousnesses of different sentient beings, in their reciprocal relations, can serve as two conditions for one another: the dominant condition and the object-condition, but not the causal condition or the immediately antecedent condition.

– Within each sentient being, the group of eight consciousnesses, in their reciprocal relations, certainly serves as dominant conditions for one another and certainly does not serve as causal conditions or immediately antecedent conditions; as for the object-condition, it may or may not be present. The eighth consciousness serves as an object-condition for the first seven consciousnesses, because the image-part of the eighth consciousness serves as the objective basis apprehended by the first seven consciousnesses. Conversely, the first seven consciousnesses do not serve as object-conditions for the eighth consciousness, because the eighth consciousness does not apprehend the seven consciousnesses. In relation to the first six consciousnesses, the seventh consciousness does not serve as an object-condition for the first five, but it does serve as an object-condition for the sixth. Conversely, the first six consciousnesses do not serve as object-conditions for the seventh consciousness. The sixth consciousness does not serve as an object-condition for the first five consciousnesses. Conversely, the first five consciousnesses serve as object-conditions for the sixth consciousness, because the first five consciousnesses apprehend only in reliance upon the image-part of the eighth consciousness.

– Regarding successive moments of consciousness of the same kind: if it is an earlier moment of the sixth consciousness in relation to a later moment, it fully possesses three conditions, except the causal condition. As for an earlier moment of each of the other seven consciousnesses in relation to a later moment of the same kind, there are the immediately antecedent condition and the dominant condition, because they apprehend only present objects. If it is accepted that the seeing-part of the five consciousnesses in a later moment apprehends the image-part of the five consciousnesses in an earlier moment, then an earlier moment of the five consciousnesses and of the seventh consciousness in relation to a later moment also possesses three conditions, except the causal condition. The seven transforming consciousnesses also serve in the sense of object-conditions for the eighth consciousness, because the manifest activity of the seven transforming consciousnesses perfumes and forms the seeds of the seeing-part and image-part within the eighth consciousness.

– The mind and mental factors belonging to the same group but having distinct substances—as, for example, the mind and mental factors of visual consciousness and so forth belong to the same group, yet the mind-king and each mental factor have their own distinct functions—in their reciprocal relations serve only as dominant conditions. This is because the mind and mental factors within the same group apprehend the same object, but they cannot apprehend one another’s seeing-parts. Or, speaking in terms of the seeing-part, their seeing-parts do not apprehend one another’s seeing-parts. Speaking in terms of the image-part, however, the seeing-part of one mind can apprehend the image-part of another, because the image-parts of the various minds mutually serve as objective bases for one another. For example, the seeds within the fundamental consciousness serve as the objective basis for the image-parts of the mental factors Contact and so forth. Were this not so, when one is born in the Formless Realm, the universally accompanying mental factors, such as Contact, would have no objects to apprehend there. Even if it is held that in the Formless Realm form produced through meditative concentration may be manifested, the mental factors Contact and so forth still necessarily apprehend seeds and then transform them into the image-parts of seeds as their objects. It cannot be said that the objective basis of the image-part belonging to a mental factor is not the same as that of the mind-king.

– The image-part, being of the same substance of self-awareness as the seeing-part, serves as both the dominant condition and object-condition for the seeing-part; the seeing-part, in relation to the image-part, serves only as a dominant condition. The seeing-part, in relation to the self-awareness part, has two conditions: the dominant condition and the object-condition. The same applies to the mutual relation between the self-awareness part and the seeing-part. Self-awareness and the awareness of self-awareness, in relation to each other, have two conditions: the dominant condition and the object-condition. This is not stated with reference to the image-parts of seeds, but refers only to the manifest dharmas of the image-part serving as conditions for one another.

The groups of eight purified consciousnesses, whether one’s own or those of others, all serve as object-conditions for one another, because purified consciousness can apprehend universally. The sole exception is that the seeing-part is not an object-condition for the image-part, because, according to correct principle, the image-part has no function of apprehending objects.

It has been explained that the manifest, discriminating activities of the eight consciousnesses arise only by depending upon seeds and manifest activities as conditions. According to correct principle, seeds must likewise arise by depending upon manifest activities and other seeds as conditions. Thus, how many conditions do manifest activities provide for seeds? How many conditions do seeds provide for other seeds?

– Seeds certainly do not arise from the object-condition or the immediately antecedent condition, because these two conditions are established only in relation to manifest mind and mental factors. If a manifest activity is related to its own seed, it serves as both a causal condition and a dominant condition. If it is related to a seed other than its own, it serves only as a dominant condition. A seed, in relation to its own succeeding seed, likewise fully serves as both a causal condition and a dominant condition; but a seed, in relation to a seed other than its own, serves only as a dominant condition.

– On the basis of internal consciousnesses reciprocally serving as conditions for the arising of causes, the doctrinal principle distinguishing cause and effect is established. If one insists that external conditions must exist, they would still be useless; how much more so when attachment to external conditions contradicts the doctrinal principle! Why cling stubbornly to them?

– Although the word “discrimination” in the verse generally refers to mind and mental factors throughout the three realms, the sacred teachings, according to whichever meaning is predominant, reveal it in many ways: sometimes as two, sometimes as three, and sometimes as five. True consciousness and manifesting consciousness constitute two; karmic consciousness, transforming consciousness, and manifesting consciousness constitute three; or mind, mentation, and consciousness constitute three; adding cognitive consciousness makes four; and adding continuous consciousness makes five. These are extensively distinguished in the treatises.

XVI. EXPLANATION OF AN OBJECTION

Although internal consciousness exists while external conditions do not, what causes sentient beings to continue in the cycle of birth and death?

The verse says:

Through the habitual energies of various karmas,

Together with the habitual energies of the two graspings,

When the preceding resultant body is exhausted,

Another resultant body is produced.

The treatise states: (First interpretation) — The various karmas are meritorious karma, unmeritorious karma, and unshakable karma; that is, wholesome and unwholesome volitional karma with outflows. Karma is formed only through deliberative volition, decisive volition, and activating volition; it is therefore called volitional karma. In other words, because the three kinds of karma take volition as their substance, they are called volitional karma. The retinues of karma are also called karma, because they jointly bring about the two resultant effects of projection and completion—projecting karma and completing karma.

Although this karma arises and immediately ceases, and therefore could not by itself bring about a future resultant effect, it perfumes the fundamental consciousness and forms therein seeds of its own functional capacity. This very capacity is called habitual energy: it is the residual potency of karma produced through perfuming. To distinguish it from past karma and present karma, it is called habitual energy. Such habitual energies continue in successive transformation until they mature and bring about resultant effects. The habitual energies of various karmas serve as an extremely powerful dominant condition for future resultant retribution.

Alternatively, grasping the image-part and the seeing-part; grasping name and form; grasping mind and mental factors; and grasping root and branches—these four kinds of grasper and grasped are all included within the two manifest graspings. The capacities that these four kinds of manifest grasping perfume into the fundamental consciousness, thereby enabling them to be directly produced, are called the habitual energies of the two graspings.

This indicates the causal seeds of the resultant mind and its associated mental factors in a subsequent life. The word “together” in the verse means that the karmic seeds and the seeds of the two graspings work jointly, serving respectively as remote and proximate conditions that assist one another. Yet although the habitual energies of karma are the more remote condition, their role in bringing about the resultant body is more evident; therefore, in the verse, they are mentioned before the habitual energies of the two graspings.

In bringing about the result, karma is the dominant condition and is therefore remote, whereas the two graspings are causal conditions and are therefore proximate.

The preceding resultant is the resultant effect brought about by karma from previous lives.

The other maturation is the maturation-result brought about by karma in subsequent lives.

Although the habit-energies of the two graspings continue to receive results without end, the habit-energy of karma receives results only for a finite period. Because the maturation-result is morally indeterminate in nature, differing from its karmic causes, which may be wholesome or unwholesome, it is difficult to bring about; whereas causes and results that are homogeneous and augmenting are alike in nature and therefore are easily brought about.

When the seeds of the various karmas that bring about birth in another life have matured, and the maturation-body of the previous life has been fully experienced, another maturation-body arises in a subsequent life. Thus birth and death revolve without end. Why, then, is it necessary to invoke external conditions to explain the continuity of birth and death?

The intent of this verse is that, through the habit-energy of karma and the two graspings, the entire cycle of birth and death is never separate from

consciousness, because mind and mental factors are the intrinsic nature of those karmas and two graspings.

(Second interpretation) — Furthermore, the continuity of birth and death is due to habit-energies, of which there are altogether three kinds:

1. Habit-energy of names and words: This refers to the distinct seeds that directly produce each conditioned dharma. Names and words are of two kinds:

a. Names and words that express meaning, namely, differentiated sounds capable of conveying meanings and things.

b. Names and words that reveal objects, namely, mind and mental factors capable of cognizing their objects. According to these two kinds of names and words, seeds are perfumed and formed, serving as the respective causes and conditions from which each conditioned dharma arises.

2. Habit-energy of attachment to self: This refers to the seeds of the false attachment to self and what belongs to the self. Attachment to self is of two kinds:

a. Innate attachment to self, namely, attachment to self and what belongs to the self that can be eliminated only through the path of cultivation (present in the sixth and seventh consciousnesses).

b. Discriminative attachment to self, namely, attachment to self and what belongs to the self that can be eliminated simply through the path of seeing (present only in the mental consciousness).

In accordance with these two kinds of attachment to self, seeds are perfumed and formed, thereby causing sentient beings to discriminate between themselves and others.

3. Habit-energy of the factors of existence (the factors of formations and existence among the twelve factors of dependent origination). This refers to the seeds of maturation-producing karma that brings about birth within the three realms. The factors of existence are of two kinds:

a. Contaminated wholesome karma, namely, karma that brings about desirable results.

b. Various unwholesome karmas, namely, karma that brings about undesirable results.

According to these two wholesome and unwholesome factors, seeds are perfumed and formed, causing maturation-results in the wholesome and unwholesome destinies to differ.

It should be understood that the habit-energy of attachment to self and the habit-energy of the factors of existence are only augmenting conditions for the differentiation of maturation-results.

The verse speaks of “the habit-energy of karma”; this should be understood as precisely the habit-energy of the factors of existence. The verse speaks of “the habit-energy of the two graspings”; this should be understood as precisely the two kinds of habit-energy consisting of attachment to self and names and words. Because they are formed through the grasping of self and what belongs to the self, and through the grasping of names and words, both are called grasping. As for the word “together,” and so forth, in the verse, these have already been explained above.

(Third interpretation) — Furthermore, the continuity of birth and death is due to afflictions, karma, and suffering. The afflictions that initiate karma (that is, the factor of ignorance) and moisten birth (that is, craving and grasping) are called afflictions. The various karmas capable of bringing about a subsequent life are called karma.

The various sufferings produced from karma are called suffering. The seeds of afflictions, karma, and suffering are all called habit-energies. The two habit-energies of afflictions and karma serve as augmenting conditions for the suffering-results of birth and death, because they assist in producing those suffering-results.

The habit-energy of suffering is a direct cause and condition of the suffering of birth and death, because it directly produces suffering. The teaching in the verse concerning the three habit-energies should be understood in this way. Afflictions and suffering are called the two graspings: afflictions are that which grasps, and suffering is that which is grasped.

Grasping means attachment; karma, however, is not called grasping. The meanings of the other passages in the verse have already been explained above.

It should be understood that these afflictions, karma, and suffering collectively encompass the twelve factors of existence, from ignorance through aging and death, as extensively explained in the Treatise.

However, the twelve factors may be briefly subsumed under four groups:

a. The factors that induce — These are ignorance and formations, which are capable of inducing the seeds of the five results: consciousness, name-and-form, the six sense entrances, contact, and feeling. Here, ignorance serves only to initiate wholesome and unwholesome karma; the wholesome and unwholesome karma thus initiated is what is called formations. Therefore, all karma whose result is experienced in the present life, as well as completing karma that assists the particular results of a future life, is not included in the “factor of formations.”

b. The factors that are induced — These are the five kinds of seeds—consciousness, name-and-form, and so forth—within the fundamental consciousness. They directly produce consciousness, name-and-form, and so forth, which constitute the future maturation-result.

Because they are induced by the first two factors, ignorance and formations, they are called the factors that are induced. Of these five factors, the seed of consciousness is the direct cause of the fundamental consciousness in the future. Among the seeds contained within consciousness, apart from the three causes corresponding to the six sense entrances, contact, and feeling, all the remaining causes belong to the seeds of name-and-form.

The latter three causes, in accordance with the sequence of their names, are the seeds of the six sense entrances, contact, and feeling. Alternatively, the seeds of name-and-form collectively encompass all five causes within the fundamental consciousness. Among those five causes, the other four are established according to whichever is predominant.

The same applies to the general and particular relationship between the six sense entrances and consciousness. (When inclusion under “name” predominates, the four—consciousness, contact, feeling, and the mental entrance—are established. When inclusion under “form” predominates, the eye entrance through the body entrance are established. The same applies to the general and particular relationship between the six sense entrances and consciousness: among the seeds, the six sense entrances collectively encompass the five causes, and whichever cause predominates determines the establishment of the other four.)

The Treatise says that the “factor of consciousness” is also that which induces. This is because the karmic seeds within consciousness are called the factor of consciousness, whereas the seeds of the maturation-consciousness are included among the seeds of the factor of name-and-form. The Sutra on Dependent Origination says: “The factor of consciousness encompasses both that which induces and that which is induced.” This is because both karmic seeds and the seeds of consciousness are called the factor of consciousness. Consciousness is the support upon which name-and-form depend; it is not included within name-and-form.

The five kinds—consciousness, name-and-form, and so forth—are produced through karmic perfuming. Although in reality they arise together, they differ as primary and attendant, general and particular, superior and inferior, and cause and result. Therefore, the sacred teachings provisionally describe these five factors as occurring in sequence: sometimes consciousness is said to precede name-and-form; sometimes name-and-form is said to precede consciousness; or, based upon the sequential arising of future results, they are described as occurring one before another.

For this reason, the five factors—consciousness and so forth—are also said to be manifest activities. While they remain in the causal state, however, there is no sense in which they are manifest activities. Alternatively, with reference to their future manifestation as results, that which is produced and that which is induced are said to be simultaneous.

The time when karmic seeds have been moistened by craving and the time when they have not yet been moistened by craving are certainly not simultaneous. (Ignorance initiates karma and simultaneously perfumes all five factors—consciousness, name-and-form, the six sense entrances, contact, and feeling. Why, then, are these five factors established as occurring in sequence? It is because consciousness is primary and the other four factors are its attendants.

Among those attendants, name-and-form is general, while the six sense entrances, contact, and feeling are particular. Among these particulars, the six sense entrances are superior, while contact and feeling are inferior. Among these inferior factors, contact is the cause and feeling is the result; thus they differ.

Alternatively, when they mature, consciousness arises first, and only afterward do name-and-form and so forth arise.)

c. The factors that produce — These are the three factors of craving, grasping, and existence, which most immediately produce “birth” and “aging and death” in the future. That is, previously, delusion concerning the internal maturation-result (delusion concerning the body) gave rise to karmas that directly bring about a subsequent life as conditions, thereby inducing the seeds that directly produce the five results—consciousness, name-and-form, and so forth—belonging to future birth and aging and death.

Then, relying upon delusion concerning external augmenting results and taking the objects of feeling as conditions, greed and craving arise. Conditioned by craving, the four kinds of grasping, such as grasping at sensual desire, then arise. Craving and grasping together moisten the karmic seeds that induce, as well as the causes consisting of the five factors that are induced.

Those very seeds of the five factors are then, in turn, called the “factor of existence,” because they most immediately give rise to the result of subsequent existence.

In some places, only the karmic seeds are called “existence,” because they are directly capable of bringing about the resultant fruit.

Elsewhere, only the five kinds of seeds—consciousness, name-and-form, and so forth—are called “existence,” because they directly produce the seeds of consciousness, name-and-form, and so forth in the future.

d. The links that are produced—These are birth and aging-and-death, because they are the links most immediately produced by craving, grasping, and existence. That is, the entire period from “intermediate existence” until “fundamental existence” has arisen but has not yet undergone deterioration is included within “birth-existence.” The stage of deterioration is called “aging”; only when the body disintegrates and life ends is it called “death.” Because aging does not invariably occur—some die prematurely—it is combined with death as the single link of aging-and-death, or death-existence.

Why is illness not established as a link? Because illness is neither universal nor certain—some die without becoming ill—and therefore it is not established. Although aging is not certain, it is universal and is therefore established as one link together with death. Throughout the three realms, six destinies, and four modes of birth, except for those who die prematurely, all who are approaching the end of life manifest the characteristics of decline and decay—aging.

Question: “Name-and-form” is not universal, so why is it established as a link?

Answer: Because it certainly occurs, it is established as a link. Among beings born from the womb, from eggs, or from moisture, name-and-form exists while the six faculties are not yet complete. Moreover, the form produced by this link is also universally present. For example, beings born by transformation possess form; at the beginning of their birth, although all five faculties are present, they are not yet functioning, and at that time this cannot yet be called the “link of the six sense entrances.” Again, when beings are first born in the Formless Realm, although the mental faculty certainly exists, it is not yet lucid and cannot yet be called the mental sense base.

Therefore, the Treatise says: “Among all the twelve links of existence, a portion of the form produced at birth is still present in the two higher realms.”

Question: If so, craving is not universally present throughout the realms; why, then, is it separately established as a link? For those born in the evil destinies do not delight in those places.

Answer: Because craving certainly occurs, it is separately established as a link. If those in the evil destinies seek nothing, there is no craving; but if they seek birth in a wholesome destiny, craving certainly exists. Although noble non-returners do not give rise to craving when their future birth is being moistened, just as with the link of grasping in relation to their bodies, the seed of craving certainly exists. Furthermore, craving is also universal throughout the realms, for those born in evil destinies still cherish their present bodies and environments. The scriptures say that craving does not exist there in reference to the absence of craving that seeks a body in an evil destiny; they do not mean that craving is entirely absent there.

Question: Why are only birth and aging-and-death established among the “links that are produced,” whereas among the “links that are led forth,” five separate links are established: consciousness, name-and-form, the six sense entrances, contact, and feeling?

Answer: Because their distinct characteristics are difficult to discern while they are still at the causal stage, five links are established with reference to their future fruits. That is, at the time of renewed birth, the causal characteristic of consciousness is evident, and so the link of consciousness is established. Next, while the six faculties are not yet complete, the characteristic of name-and-form is prominent, and so the link of name-and-form is established.

Next, when the six faculties are complete, the characteristic of the six sense entrances flourishes, and so the link of the six sense entrances is established. Contact then arises dependent upon them, and feeling arises because of contact. Only at that time is the fruition said to be complete.

With reference to these stages of fruition, the causes are established as five links.

At the stage of fruition, the distinct characteristics are readily apparent; therefore, they are generally established as the two links of birth and aging-and-death, which are sufficient to reveal the three kinds of suffering: birth is the suffering of conditioned existence, aging is the suffering of change, and death is the suffering of suffering.

However, when the fruits to be produced still lie in the future, the two links of birth and aging-and-death are taught in order to cause sentient beings to develop disenchantment. When those fruits have already reached the present, the five links of consciousness, name-and-form, the six sense entrances, contact, and feeling are taught in order to enable sentient beings to understand their future stages.

Question: Why is only the single link of ignorance generally established with regard to the production of karma, while the two separate links of craving and grasping are established with regard to the moistening of birth?

Answer: Although all afflictions can produce karma and moisten birth, at the stage of producing karma, ignorance is more powerful, because it possesses eleven prominent features, including its objects and modes of activity, as extensively explained in the scriptures. At the stage of moistening birth, craving is more powerful, because craving, like water, is able to moisten. Only through repeated moistening can the sprout of “existence” arise.

Based on craving at the beginning and craving at the end, craving and grasping are distinguished. The production of karma, however, cannot occur through repeated production; therefore, there is only the single link of ignorance. Although the link of grasping encompasses all the afflictions, craving has the stronger moistening power and is therefore said to be prominent.

– All links of dependent arising pertain to their own respective levels. Nevertheless, “formations” may also arise dependent upon ignorance belonging to another level, as when ignorance on a lower level produces the link of “formations” in a higher realm. Were this not so, when a person has just subdued the defilements of a lower level and gives rise to the meditative concentration of a higher level, would that not constitute giving rise to those “formations”? For at that time, the ignorance belonging to that higher level has not yet arisen.

– When persons are born from a higher level into a lower level, or from a lower level into a higher level, what feeling do they take as an object when craving arises? Such craving may take as its object either the feeling of the place where they are about to be born, or an actively manifest feeling, or the seed of feeling; none of these contradicts reason.

– Among these twelve links, the first ten causal links and the last two resultant links are certainly not simultaneous. Among the ten causal links, the first seven and craving, grasping, and existence may or may not be simultaneous. The two links of birth and aging-and-death, taken separately, are certainly simultaneous; the three links of craving, grasping, and existence are certainly simultaneous; and the seven links from ignorance through feeling are certainly simultaneous with one another.

– These twelve links form a single cycle of cause and effect, which is sufficient to clarify the nature of cyclic existence and to transcend the two views of annihilationism and eternalism. Establishing two cycles of cause and effect would truly be useless. Establishing still more cycles would incur the fault of infinite regress.

These twelve links are further distinguished according to the following categories:

1. The category of the nominal and the real—Among the twelve links, nine links are real, while the last three—existence, birth, and aging-and-death—are nominal. Because the six links of formations, consciousness, name-and-form, the six sense entrances, contact, and feeling are moistened by craving and grasping and collectively called “existence,” existence is nominal. And because the five links of consciousness, name-and-form, the six sense entrances, contact, and feeling possess the three differing characteristics of birth, aging, and death, birth and aging-and-death are nominal.

2. The category of being a single entity or not a single entity—Ignorance, consciousness, contact, feeling, and craving, these five links, each consist of a single entity; the remaining links do not each consist of a single entity.

3. The category of defiled and undefiled—The three links of ignorance, craving, and grasping are exclusively defiled, because they are afflictive in nature. The other seven links are exclusively undefiled, because they are resultant fruits. Yet defilements can arise during the stages represented by those seven links; therefore, those seven links are conventionally said to comprise both the defiled and the undefiled.

4. The category distinguishing isolated characteristics and composite characteristics—The three links of ignorance, craving, and grasping have isolated characteristics because they are not intermixed with the other links; the remaining links have only composite characteristics.

5. The category of form and non-form—The six links of ignorance, consciousness, contact, feeling, craving, and grasping are exclusively non-form; the remaining links comprise both form and non-form.

6–7. The categories of contaminated and conditioned, and uncontaminated and unconditioned—All twelve links are contaminated and exclusively conditioned; the uncontaminated and unconditioned are not among the twelve links of existence.

8. The category of the three moral natures—Ignorance, craving, and grasping comprise only the unwholesome and the obscured-neutral natures. “Formations” possess only wholesome and unwholesome natures. “Existence” comprises the wholesome, unwholesome, and unobscured-neutral natures. The other seven links are exclusively unobscured-neutral, although wholesome and defiled states may also arise during the stages represented by those seven links.

9. The aspect of the three realms—Although all twelve links extend throughout the three realms, the Desire Realm possesses all twelve links in full, while the Formless Realm possesses only some of them.

10. The aspect of that which knows and that which is known—The “link of formations” belonging to a higher plane can suppress the afflictions of a lower plane. Precisely because one becomes disenchanted with the three characteristics of suffering, coarseness, and obstruction, and delights in the three characteristics of purity, subtlety, and freedom, one gives rise to the aspiration to be born in a higher realm, and thus that link of formations arises.

11. The aspect of those in training and those beyond training—None of the twelve links belongs to those in training or those beyond training, because when a noble one takes clear wisdom as the condition and gives rise to wholesome outflow-tainted karma, this is contrary to the link of existence and is not included within it. Therefore, one should know that noble ones no longer create karma that brings about a body in a future life, because they do not deludedly seek the painful fruit of a future existence. Nevertheless, they may additionally cultivate the dhyanas in an intermingled manner to assist old karma from a lower realm and thereby be born among the Five Pure Abodes; this does not contradict reason.

12. The aspect of the three kinds of abandonment—One view holds that ignorance belongs only to what is abandoned through seeing, because actions can arise only when there is delusion concerning the truths. Noble ones certainly no longer create karma for a future life.

The two links of craving and clinging belong only to what is abandoned through cultivation, because the “afflictions that nurture birth” arise from craving for a future existence. This is because the nine kinds of mind that arise at the time of death all arise together with “innate craving” (the nine kinds of mind at death are as follows: when dying in the Desire Realm, one may give rise to a mind of the Desire Realm, the Form Realm, or the Formless Realm; likewise, when dying in the Form Realm or the Formless Realm).

Apart from ignorance, craving, and clinging, the other nine links extend to both what is abandoned through seeing and what is abandoned through cultivation.

Another view holds that all twelve links extend to both what is abandoned through seeing and what is abandoned through cultivation, because the treatise states: “A stream-enterer has abandoned a portion of every link of existence,” but no one has abandoned them all completely. If the link of ignorance belonged only to what is abandoned through seeing, why would it be said that a stream-enterer has not abandoned it completely?

If craving and clinging belonged only to what is abandoned through cultivation, why would it be said that a stream-enterer has abandoned a portion of every link? It is also said that all afflictions throughout an entire realm can bind one to birth—that is, they can be afflictions that nurture birth. It is further said that actions leading to the evil destinies arise only through conceptually discriminated afflictions; it does not say that the afflictions nurturing birth belong only to what is abandoned through cultivation, nor does it say that all actions bringing about a future life arise from afflictions abandoned through seeing.

Therefore, one should know that the three links of ignorance, craving, and clinging also extend to both what is abandoned through seeing and what is abandoned through cultivation. However, the “ignorance” that directly gives rise to the link of “formations” leading to the evil destinies belongs only to what is abandoned through seeing; if it assists in producing karmic formations leading to other destinies, its classification is not fixed.

If the two links of “craving” and “clinging” directly nurture birth, they belong only to what is abandoned through cultivation; if they merely assist in nurturing birth, their classification is not fixed.

– Furthermore, dharmas whose intrinsic nature is defiled are to be abandoned, because when the counteractive path arises, they are definitively eliminated. The intrinsic nature of outflow-tainted but undefiled dharmas, however, is not something to be abandoned, because such dharmas do not conflict with the factors of the path. Nevertheless, they are said to be abandoned in two senses:

a. Through release from bondage—This means abandoning the afflictions that take outflow-tainted dharmas as their objects and that are intermingled with outflow-tainted dharmas.

b. Through non-arising—This means abandoning the basis—namely, conceptually discriminated afflictions—of outflow-tainted dharmas, thereby preventing those dharmas from arising.

On the basis of the foregoing meaning of release from bondage, it is said that the wholesome, outflow-tainted portion of the links of formations and existence, together with the seven links of consciousness, name-and-form, and so forth, which are unobscured and indeterminate, belong only to what is abandoned through cultivation. On the basis of abandonment through non-arising, it is said that the portion of the links of formations and existence that brings about the evil destinies and the meditative attainment of non-perception belongs only to what is abandoned through seeing.

Thus, it should be said that the twelve links extend to both what is abandoned through seeing and what is abandoned through cultivation. The various modes of abandonment should be understood as explained above.

13. The aspect of association with the three feelings—Of the twelve links, ten are associated with pleasant and neutral feelings, because the link of “feeling” is not associated with feeling, and the link of aging-and-death for the most part does not have pleasant or neutral feeling. Eleven links, including the link of “birth,” are associated with painful feeling, except that feeling is not associated with itself. A portion of eleven links is included within the suffering of change.

14. The aspect of the three kinds of suffering—A small portion of all twelve links is included within suffering as suffering, because painful feeling is present in every link. All twelve links in their entirety are included within the suffering of conditioned existence, because all outflow-tainted dharmas are the suffering of conditioned existence. With respect to neutral feeling, a portion of eleven links belongs to the suffering of conditioned existence; the link of aging-and-death is included within the suffering of change. This is the true meaning, but in the sacred teachings the explanation is given according to whichever characteristic is predominant, and therefore it is not fixed.

15. The aspect of the Four Noble Truths—All twelve links belong to the Truth of Suffering, because they are of the nature of the appropriated skandhas. The five links of ignorance, formations, craving, clinging, and existence are also included within the Truth of Origin, because they are of the nature of afflictions.

16. The aspect of the four conditions—The links invariably serve as dominant conditions for one another; whether the other three conditions are present or absent is not fixed. The sutras, speaking according to what is certain, state only that the condition involved is the dominant condition.

“Craving” in relation to “clinging,” and “existence” in relation to “birth,” may serve as causal conditions. If the “link of consciousness” is a karmic seed, the “link of formations” in relation to the link of consciousness may also serve as a causal condition. The other links do not serve as causal conditions for one another.

However, when the compendium of treatises states, “Ignorance in relation to formations serves as a causal condition,” it speaks with reference to the karmic habitual tendencies present at the time of ignorance. Because that karma is associated with ignorance, it is provisionally called ignorance, whereas in reality it is the seed of formations.

– The Yogacara Treatise states: “The links serve only as the other three conditions for one another” and do not serve as causal conditions. Here, however, it is said that present craving and clinging serve as causal conditions for each other. Only karmic seeds serve as causal conditions. Ignorance in relation to formations, craving in relation to clinging, and birth in relation to aging-and-death involve the two conditions of immediately antecedent condition and objective condition. “Existence” in relation to “birth” involves only the objective condition. The other links do not serve for one another as the two conditions of dominant condition and immediately antecedent condition.

– The foregoing explains the true meaning of dependent arising in terms of an immediate and orderly sequence, without intermixture or confusion. Apart from this, whether the various links serve as conditions for one another is not fixed. Those endowed with discernment should contemplate this correctly and in accordance with reason.

17. The aspect of afflictions, karma, and suffering—The three categories of afflictions, karma, and suffering completely encompass the twelve links. Ignorance, craving, and clinging are included within afflictions; formations in their entirety and one portion of existence belong to karma; the seven links of consciousness, name-and-form, the six sense entrances, contact, feeling, birth, and aging-and-death, together with one portion of existence, belong to suffering.

Where it is said that karma is entirely included within existence, one should know that this is stated with reference to karmic existence.

Where it is said that consciousness is included within karma, this is stated by taking the karmic seed to be the link of consciousness.

The fruit brought about by afflictions and karma is called only suffering, because it is included within the Truth of Suffering and is to be regarded with disenchantment. Afflictions, karma, and suffering are precisely the twelve links, and they cause birth and death to continue in an unbroken succession.

(The fourth point)—Furthermore, the continuity of birth and death is due to internal causes and conditions, not external causes and conditions; therefore, it is said that there is consciousness only.

The causes are the two kinds of karma, outflow-tainted and non-outflow-tainted, which directly bring about birth and death. The conditions are the two obstructions, the afflictive obstruction and the cognitive obstruction, which assist in bringing about that birth and death.

Why is this so? Because birth and death are of two kinds:

1. Delimited birth and death—This refers to wholesome and unwholesome outflow-tainted karma which, assisted by the power of the afflictive obstruction as a condition, brings about coarse maturation-results in the three realms, with bodies and lifespans that may be long-lived or short-lived. Because these limits are determined by the power of causes and conditions, it is called delimited birth and death.

2. Inconceivable transformation birth-and-death — This refers to discriminative uncontaminated karma which, aided by the power of the cognitive hindrance as a condition, brings forth a subtle and excellent retribution with a body and lifespan. Through the power of compassionate vows, this body and lifespan undergo transformation without fixed limitation; therefore, it is called transformation. Because it is brought forth precisely with uncontaminated samadhi as an assisting condition, and because its wondrous functioning is difficult to fathom, it is called inconceivable.

The body of transformation birth-and-death is also called a mind-made body. This means that it comes into being according to one’s intention and vow.

As a sutra says: “With appropriation as the condition and contaminated karma as the cause, there is continuation into a subsequent existence, and thus birth occurs within the three realms. In the same way, with the ground of abiding ignorance as the condition and uncontaminated karma as the cause, there are three classes of mind-made bodies: those of arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and sovereign bodhisattvas. These are also called transformation bodies because, through the power of uncontaminated samadhi, they are transformed into something different from their original form, just like a magical transformation.”

Question: If, as a treatise says, “Sravakas beyond training have permanently terminated the body of subsequent existence,” how can they attain unsurpassed bodhi?

Answer: They attain unsurpassed bodhi by relying on a transformation body, not on a body produced by karmic retribution; therefore, this does not contradict reason.

Question: If the cognitive hindrance serves as an assisting condition whereby uncontaminated karma can bring forth birth-and-death, then those of the two vehicles with fixed dispositions could never enter nirvana without remainder permanently, since those of the two vehicles still possess the cognitive hindrance.

Answer: In this respect, they are like ordinary beings who are bound by the afflictions and cannot enter nirvana.

— How, then, can the Truth of the Path actually bring forth the fruit of suffering?

— Who says that it actually brings it forth?

— If not, then how does it occur?

— Uncontaminated samadhi serves as an assisting condition for contaminated karma, enabling the fruit already attained to continue for a long time and progressively become more excellent. It is only conventionally said to “bring forth” that fruit. When it brings it forth in this way, the cognitive hindrance serves as a condition providing assistance; it is not that the cognitive hindrance alone can bring it forth.

Question: Yet the cognitive hindrance does not obstruct liberation, because it does not have the function of initiating karma and nourishing birth. Why, then, is its assistance needed to bring forth the painful retribution of birth-and-death?

Answer: It assists in bringing this forth so that one may personally attain bodhi and benefit sentient beings. That is, sravakas and pratyekabuddhas of indeterminate disposition, as well as bodhisattvas of great vows who have attained mastery through their great vows, have permanently severed and subdued the afflictions and can no longer receive a body of future portioned birth-and-death. Yet, fearing that the prolonged practice of the bodhisattva path might be abandoned, they employ the power of vows and excellent uncontaminated samadhi, in the manner of extending one’s lifespan, to sustain the karmic cause of the present body.

This causes that karmic cause to endure, so that the present body of retribution continues to live for a long time without ceasing. Repeatedly proceeding in this way, through the support of samadhi and karma, they cultivate until they attain unsurpassed bodhi.

Question: If so, why must they rely on the cognitive hindrance for support?

Answer: Because they have not yet perfectly realized signless great compassion. Without the cognitive hindrance that grasps bodhi and sentient beings as truly existent, there would be no basis for generating an intense mind of compassionate resolve. Furthermore, because the cognitive hindrance obstructs great bodhi, they retain the body for a long time in order to eliminate it permanently. Moreover, the cognitive hindrance is the basis upon which contaminated dharmas depend. If this hindrance did not exist, those contaminated dharmas certainly would not exist. Therefore, the cognitive hindrance provides great assistance in sustaining the body for a long time.

If a body is retained for a long time through the support of contaminated samadhi and vows, that body is included within portioned birth-and-death, because it belongs to the sphere of those of the two vehicles and ordinary beings. If it is supported by uncontaminated samadhi and vows, that body is included within transformation birth-and-death, because it does not belong to the sphere of those of the two vehicles or ordinary beings.

Thus, one should know that transformation birth-and-death is contaminated in nature and is included within the fruit of retribution; in relation to uncontaminated karma, it is an empowering fruit. Where the sacred teachings say that one emerges in the three realms through the uncontaminated, this is stated according to uncontaminated karma serving as an assisting cause.

— In the verse, “the habitual energies of various kinds of karma” refers precisely to the seeds of the two kinds of karma, contaminated and uncontaminated, just discussed. “The habitual energies of the two appropriations” refers precisely to the seeds of the two hindrances, the afflictive hindrance and the cognitive hindrance, just discussed. Because both involve attachment, they are called the two appropriations. The word “together,” and the other expressions in the verse, are to be explained as before.

— Although transformation birth-and-death is not divided into successive portions of retribution in which one dies and another is born, nevertheless, because it undergoes earlier and later changes through the sustaining power of samadhi, it also has the sense that an earlier retribution ends and a later retribution is born. Although manifest karma and the two appropriations also cause birth-and-death to continue, their seeds must necessarily exist. Therefore, the verse mentions only habitual energies, that is, the seeds, because they are always present, unlike manifest activity, which sometimes appears and sometimes remains latent.

Alternatively, to show that the cause and fruit of true retribution never depart from the root consciousness, manifest activity is not mentioned.

The manifest causes of retribution belonging to the six consciousnesses do not yield their fruit immediately; they must first perfume and produce seeds, which subsequently yield the fruit. The evolving consciousnesses, moreover, are interrupted and are merely born of retribution, not true retribution. Therefore, the statement in the verse, “When the former retribution has ended, a later retribution is born,” is intended specifically to refer to the eighth consciousness, which is true retribution.

The cycle of birth-and-death passes through the three times—the past, the intermediate present, and the future—without needing to await external conditions, but occurs solely through internal consciousness. One should know that the continuity of pure dharmas among the noble ones is likewise. That is, from beginningless time, the originally existing uncontaminated seeds have rested upon the root consciousness, while others are repeatedly perfumed and produced by the evolving consciousnesses.

They gradually increase in excellence until, upon ultimately attaining Buddhahood, one transforms and abandons the consciousness-seeds that have always been defiled and transforms and attains the newly arisen pure consciousness-seeds, which spontaneously sustain all seeds of merit. Through the power of original vows, all wondrous functions arise and continue without end to the furthest reaches of the future.

— Therefore, one should know that it is solely through internal consciousness that birth-and-death continues.

XVII. THE THREE NATURES

— If there is only consciousness, why does the Blessed One teach in the sutras that there are three natures?

One should know that the three natures also do not depart from consciousness. Why is this so?

The verse says:

Through this and that pervasive conceptualization,

All kinds of things are conceptualized;

This conceptualized nature

Is entirely nonexistent.

The other-dependent nature

Arises from discriminating conditions;

The perfectly accomplished within it

Is always far removed from conceptualization.

Therefore, in relation to the other-dependent,

It is neither different nor not different;

Like impermanence and the other natures,

Only upon seeing this does one see that.

The Treatise says: Because it universally calculates and clings to all manner of things, it is called pervasive conceptualization. There are many categories of pervasive conceptualization; therefore, the verse says “this and that.” This is precisely the nature of the falsely discriminating subject that engages in pervasive conceptualization. It is this falsely discriminating nature of the various conceptualizing subjects that universally clings to all conceptualized objects.

Thus, it falsely grasps the five skandhas, twelve ayatanas, eighteen dhatus, and so forth as truly possessing a self or dharmas, together with their intrinsic natures and differentiating attributes, such as the permanence or impermanence of the self and dharmas. The intrinsic natures and differentiating attributes of self and dharmas that are falsely grasped in this way are collectively called the nature of the conceptually constructed.

This conceptually constructed nature is entirely nonexistent, because examination by scriptural teaching and reasoning shows that it cannot be found.

– Alternatively, the first line of the verse, "Through this and that conceptual construction," speaks of the consciousness that conceptualizes. The second line, "It conceptually constructs all kinds of things," speaks of the objects that are conceptualized. Only the latter half of the verse speaks of the conceptually constructed nature—whether self or dharmas—whose intrinsic nature does not exist, since it has already been extensively and clearly explained to be unobtainable.

– First of all, what is the intrinsic character of that which conceptualizes?

– One opinion holds that all eight consciousnesses and all contaminated mental factors are that which conceptualizes, because their intrinsic nature is false discrimination, appearing as though it were the apprehending aspect, which grasps, and the apprehended aspect, which is grasped. It is also said that the alaya-consciousness takes as its object the seeds of the deluded attachment to the intrinsic nature of the conceptually constructed.

– Another opinion holds that only the mental group of the sixth and seventh consciousnesses, which apprehend self and dharmas, is that which conceptualizes. The sutras, however, say only that mental consciousness is that which conceptualizes, because manas and consciousness are collectively called mental consciousness; deliberation and discrimination constitute conceptualization. This is because apprehension of self and dharmas necessarily belongs to the mental factor of wisdom; because apprehension of self and dharmas invariably arises together with the mental factor of ignorance; because nowhere is ignorance said to be wholesome in nature; because delusion on one side and non-delusion on the other are incompatible; because it is never seen that one who engages in apprehension thereby arrives at "non-cognition"; because attachment to existence and attachment to nonexistence cannot arise together; and because there has never been any apprehension that was not capable of perfuming. Since contaminated minds cannot realize true principle, they are all called false discrimination, but they are not therefore all that which conceptualizes.

For although they appear as though they had an apprehended aspect and an apprehending aspect, they are not all that which conceptualizes. One must not claim that uncontaminated mind also has apprehension; for if uncontaminated mind also had apprehension, would the Tathagata's uncontaminated subsequently attained wisdom also engage in conceptual construction?

A sutra says: "The Buddha's subsequently attained wisdom manifests images of bodies and is like a mirror." If it lacked the functions of apprehending subject and apprehended object, it would not be wisdom. Although the sacred teachings say that the store consciousness takes the seeds of conceptual construction as its objects, they do not say that it "only" takes conceptual construction as its object; therefore, this is not valid evidence.

For these reasons, only the mental groups of the sixth and seventh consciousnesses have the nature of that which conceptualizes.

Although there are two groups of consciousness—the sixth and seventh consciousnesses—conceptual construction operates with respect to two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, and up to twenty distinct dharmas, such as name, meaning, permanence, impermanence, wholesomeness, unwholesomeness, and so forth. Therefore, the verse says, "this and that."

Next, what is the intrinsic nature of that which is conceptualized?

– The Mahayana-samgraha says: "It is the other-dependent nature, which serves as the objective condition of the conceptualizing mind."

Question: - Why is the perfectly accomplished nature not an object of conceptual construction?

Answer: - Because true nature is not an object apprehended by deluded attachment. If explained in terms of indirect relation, it too may be said to be that which is conceptualized. Yet although the self and dharmas of the conceptually constructed nature are objects of the conceptualizing mind, they are not objective conditions, because self and dharmas are unreal and serve merely as objects, like a second moon. Therefore, the perfectly accomplished nature is not that which is conceptualized.

– What is the character of the conceptually constructed nature? How does it differ from the other-dependent nature?

– One opinion holds that contaminated minds and mental factors throughout the three realms, through false perfuming, produce what appears as two aspects: the apprehending aspect and the apprehended aspect, namely, that which grasps and that which is grasped. These two aspects exist from the standpoint of subjective conception but not according to principle. The character of these two is called the conceptually constructed nature. The self-cognizing aspect, the substance of consciousness upon which the apprehending and apprehended aspects depend, truly arises in dependence upon conditions; its nature is not nonexistent. It is therefore called the other-dependent nature, because it arises from the conditions of false discrimination. How is this known? Because the sacred teachings say: "False discrimination is the other-dependent nature," while the two apprehensions are called the conceptually constructed nature. (This passage takes the self-cognizing aspect as the other-dependent nature and the apprehending and apprehended aspects as the conceptually constructed nature—this is not correct.)

– Another opinion holds that all minds and mental factors, through the power of perfuming, transform into the two aspects of apprehending and apprehended. Because these two aspects arise from conditions, they too are other-dependent. Relying upon them, conceptual construction falsely apprehends a definitely existent and real self and dharmas, existence and nonexistence, identity and difference, both, neither, and so forth; only this is called the conceptually constructed nature. For the sacred teachings state that consciousness-only, the two aspects alone—the apprehending and apprehended—and all such things are called the other-dependent nature. (The meaning of this passage is correct.)

Moreover, the four dharmas—the apprehended aspect, the apprehending aspect, self-cognition, and cognition of self-cognition—and the eleven consciousnesses discussed in the treatise—such as body-consciousness, namely the five bodily consciousnesses; the perceiver-consciousness, namely defiled manas; and the recipient-consciousness, namely the mental element, and so forth—are all other-dependent. If the apprehending and apprehended aspects were not other-dependent, then the two aspects of uncontaminated subsequently attained wisdom would be called conceptually constructed.

If one accepted them as conceptually constructed, then noble wisdom would either not arise by taking the two aspects of apprehending and apprehended as its objects, or noble wisdom taking those two aspects as its objects would not belong to the Truth of the Path. If one does not accept that the apprehending and apprehended aspects of subsequently attained wisdom are conceptually constructed, the two aspects of contaminated mind must likewise not be so.

Moreover, if the apprehending and apprehended aspects were conceptually constructed, then, like a hare's horns, they could not be called objective conditions, because the substance of the conceptually constructed nature has no real existence.

Moreover, if the apprehending and apprehended aspects were unreal, they could not perfume and form seeds; consequently, subsequently arising consciousness would have no such two aspects.

Moreover, latent tendencies are the apprehended aspect of the eighth consciousness. If they were likewise unreal dharmas, how could they serve as causal conditions producing the active manifestations of the eight consciousnesses?

Moreover, if the apprehending and apprehended aspects within consciousness, although arising from conditions, were not other-dependent, then the substance of consciousness—the self-cognizing aspect upon which those apprehending and apprehended aspects depend—would be the same, because there is no difference between their causes.

For these reasons, all intrinsic substances of minds and mental factors, together with their apprehended and apprehending aspects, that arise from conditions—whether contaminated or uncontaminated—are other-dependent, for they arise in dependence upon other conditions.

The verse says, "Arising through conditions of discrimination," to indicate the defiled portion of the other-dependent nature. The pure portion of the other-dependent may also be called perfectly accomplished. Alternatively, all defiled and pure minds and mental factors are called discrimination because they are capable of cognizing objects; hence all defiled and pure other-dependent phenomena are included within this other-dependent nature.

– The fully accomplished true nature of all dharmas, revealed by the twofold emptiness, is called the perfectly accomplished nature. This indicates that its essential nature is all-pervasive, everlasting, and free from falsity and error, thereby distinguishing it from particular characteristics, which are not all-pervasive; common characteristics, which are not everlasting; and space, non-self, and so forth, which are falsely conceived.

Alternatively, ultimately undefiled conditioned dharmas are free from error, possess a supreme and universally pervasive function, and are also called the perfectly accomplished nature. Yet the present verse chiefly speaks of the former meaning, not the latter. The former meaning is that the perfectly accomplished nature is precisely the nature of suchness revealed by the twofold emptiness, because, within the other-dependent nature, it is always free from the previously described imagined nature.

The words “within it” in the verse indicate that the perfectly accomplished nature and the other-dependent nature are neither identical nor separate. The words “always free from” indicate that the falsely apprehended grasper and grasped do not eternally exist. The word “previously” indicates the absence of the imagined nature, not the absence of the other-dependent nature.

The word “nature” indicates the “twofold emptiness,” not the perfectly accomplished nature, because suchness—the perfectly accomplished nature—is free from both the nature of existence and that of nonexistence.

For the foregoing reasons, this perfectly accomplished nature and that other-dependent nature are neither different nor not different. If they were different, suchness would not be the true nature of the other-dependent; if they were not different, this true nature of suchness would become impermanent like the other-dependent. If that other-dependent nature and this suchness were both entirely pure objects or both entirely impure objects, then fundamental wisdom and subsequently acquired wisdom would have no difference in function. (Because suchness is wholly pure, whereas the other-dependent encompasses both purity and impurity, the two wisdoms differ in the objects they cognize. Fundamental wisdom cognizes suchness; subsequently acquired wisdom cognizes the other-dependent.)

– How are the perfectly accomplished nature and the other-dependent nature neither different nor one?

Consider the nature of impermanence in impermanent dharmas. If the nature of impermanence were different from those dharmas, then those dharmas would not be impermanent; if it were not different from them, this impermanence would not be the common characteristic of those dharmas.

Through this analogy, it is shown that this perfectly accomplished nature and that other-dependent nature are neither one nor different. Dharmas and their Dharma-nature must necessarily be so. The ultimate truth and conventional truth are established only in mutual relation.

It is not possible to perceive the other-dependent nature without realizing and seeing the perfectly accomplished nature, for unless one has realized that the imagined nature is empty, one cannot know as it truly is that the other-dependent nature exists.

Only after nonconceptual wisdom has realized suchness can subsequently acquired wisdom fully comprehend the other-dependent nature as being like an illusion.

Although, since beginningless time, mind and mental factors have been able to cognize their own objective and subjective aspects, because attachment to self and dharmas has always been associated with them, they do not know as it truly is that these are produced by mind and mental factors through the influence of conditions and false discrimination, appearing like illusions, mirages, dreams, reflections in a mirror, plays of light, echoes, the moon in water, and magical transformations—nonexistent, yet appearing to exist. In accordance with such meanings, the verse says:

Without seeing true suchness,

One cannot comprehend conditioned phenomena,

All of which resemble illusory things:

Though they appear to exist, they are not real.

This verse means that the three kinds of intrinsic nature are all inseparable from mind and mental factors. That is, mind, mental factors, and the various things they manifest all arise through conditions. Like illusory things, they are nonexistent yet appear to exist, deceiving the foolish. All these are called the other-dependent nature. Regarding these various other-dependent phenomena, the foolish falsely apprehend selves and dharmas, existence and nonexistence, identity and difference, both and neither. Like flowers seen in empty space, they have neither nature nor characteristics. All such apprehensions are called the imagined nature.

All the falsely apprehended selves and dharmas based upon that other-dependent nature are empty. The true nature of consciousness revealed through that emptiness is called the perfectly accomplished nature. Therefore, these three natures are all inseparable from mind.

Question: - Under which of the above three natures are the unconditioned dharmas of space, cessation through discernment, and cessation independent of discernment subsumed?

Answer: - All three natures subsume them. Mind and mental factors manifest semblances of the characteristics of space and so forth. Because these arise in dependence upon mind, they are subsumed under the other-dependent nature. When the foolish falsely apprehend those characteristics as truly existent, that is precisely the imagined nature. If the unconditioned dharmas of space, cessation through discernment, and cessation independent of discernment are provisionally designated on the basis of suchness, they are subsumed under the perfectly accomplished nature.

The unconditioned as cognized by a defiled mind is necessarily included within the other-dependent nature. The unconditioned as cognized by an undefiled mind may be included within two natures: because it arises through conditions, it belongs to the other-dependent; because the mind is free from error, it belongs to the perfectly accomplished nature.

– How do these three natures and the seven kinds of suchness subsume one another?

– The seven kinds of suchness are:

1. Suchness of transmigration - The true nature of conditioned dharmas.

2. Suchness of reality - The true nature revealed by the twofold selflessness.

3. Suchness of consciousness-only - The true nature of defiled and pure dharmas, namely consciousness-only.

4. Suchness of establishment - The true nature of the Truth of Suffering.

5. Suchness of wrong conduct - The true nature of the Truth of the Origin of Suffering.

6. Suchness of purity - The true nature of the Truth of Cessation.

7. Suchness of right conduct - The true nature of the Truth of the Path.

These seven true natures are subsumed under the perfectly accomplished nature because they are the objects of both fundamental wisdom and subsequently acquired wisdom. According to their respective associations, the three kinds—the suchnesses of transmigration, suffering, and the origin of suffering—are included within the imagined and other-dependent natures because they involve false apprehension and defilement. The remaining four are included within the perfectly accomplished nature.

– How do the three natures and the six dharmas subsume one another?

– Each of those six dharmas contains all three natures. Form, feeling, perception, formations, consciousness, and the unconditioned—all six dharmas—each involve false apprehension (the imagined), arising through conditions (the other-dependent), and true principle (the perfectly accomplished).

– How do the three natures and the five phenomena subsume one another?

– The sacred teachings state: “Their mutual inclusion is not fixed.” That is, some passages state that the other-dependent subsumes four phenomena: characteristics, names, discrimination, and right wisdom; the perfectly accomplished subsumes suchness; and the imagined does not subsume any of the five phenomena.

The semblance of the characteristics of what is expressed, manifested by defiled mind and mental factors, is called characteristics. The semblance of the characteristics of that which expresses, manifested and provisionally established, is called a name. The mind that performs the manifestation is established as discrimination. Because undefiled mind is free from conceptual proliferation, it is simply called right wisdom, not that which expresses or that which is expressed. All four phenomena arise through conditions and are therefore subsumed under the other-dependent nature.

Some passages state that the other-dependent subsumes characteristics and discrimination; the imagined subsumes names; and right wisdom and suchness are subsumed under the perfectly accomplished nature. It is further said that the objective aspects of defiled mind and mental factors are called characteristics, while the remainder is called discrimination. The imagined is entirely without real substance; to reveal that it does not exist, it is provisionally spoken of as a name. Because right wisdom and suchness are free from error, these two are subsumed under the perfectly accomplished nature.

Some passages state that the other-dependent nature subsumes only discrimination; the imagined subsumes characteristics and names; and right wisdom and suchness are subsumed under the perfectly accomplished nature. This means that the objective and subjective aspects of defiled mind and mental factors are collectively called discrimination because their intrinsic nature is false discrimination. That which expresses and that which is expressed within the imagined nature are, according to deluded cognition, established as the two phenomena of names and characteristics.

Elsewhere it is said that name belongs only to the dependent nature, while meaning (characteristic) belongs to the imagined nature. This means that the objective and subjective aspects of defiled minds and mental factors become objects of imagination through the power of names; hence they are called names. What is imagined and grasped is falsely apprehended in accordance with names and has no real substance; therefore it is provisionally established and called meaning (that is, characteristic).

In the sacred teachings, the five phenomena are discussed in many places. Although the wording differs, the meanings do not contradict one another. Among the explanations given above, however, the first is unmixed and orderly, as extensively explained in the Yogācārabhūmi Treatise; this should be understood.

– Again, the sacred teachings say: “How are the five characteristics—the characteristic of that which expresses, the characteristic of that which is expressed, the characteristic of the mutual relation between that which expresses and that which is expressed, the characteristic of attachment, and the characteristic of nonattachment—included within the three natures?”

– The characteristics of that which is expressed and that which expresses each comprise all three natures. That is, what is falsely imagined and grasped as that which is expressed and that which expresses belongs to the imagined nature. Characteristics, names, and discrimination, according to their appropriate functions—characteristics and names being that which is expressed, and discrimination being that which expresses—belong to the dependent nature. Suchness and correct wisdom, according to whether they appropriately function as that which expresses or that which is expressed, belong to the perfected nature, because subsequently attained wisdom transforms itself into an appearance resembling the characteristic of that which expresses. The characteristic of the “mutual relation” between that which is expressed and that which expresses belongs only to the imagined nature, because meaning and name are falsely apprehended as being necessarily connected with each other. The fourth characteristic, attachment, is solely of the dependent nature, because false discrimination is its intrinsic nature. The fifth characteristic, nonattachment, is solely of the perfected nature, because undefiled wisdom is its intrinsic nature.

– Again, the sacred teachings say: “How are the four realities—worldly reality, reality according to reason, the reality of purification from the afflictive hindrances, and the reality of purification from the cognitive hindrances—included within the three natures?”

– The two realities of the world and of reason belong to the dependent nature and are included within the three phenomena of names, characteristics, and discrimination.

– The two realities known through wisdom purified of the two hindrances—the afflictive and cognitive hindrances—belong to the perfected nature and are included within the two phenomena of correct wisdom and suchness.

– The Madhyāntavibhāga Treatise says: “Worldly reality belongs only to the imagined nature,” because it consists of things commonly accepted and apprehended by the world. The second, reality according to reason, belongs to all three natures, because reason encompasses apprehension and nonapprehension, defilement and purity. The final two realities belong only to the perfected nature.

– How are the three natures and the Four Truths mutually inclusive?

– Each Truth comprises all three natures.

Thus, within the “Truth of Suffering,” each of impermanence, non-self, and so forth comprises all three natures. Impermanence is threefold:

a. Impermanence as the absence of nature, because its nature is eternally nonexistent.

b. Impermanence of arising and ceasing, because there is arising and there is cessation.

c. Impermanence of defilement and purity, because states undergo transformation, being at times defiled and at times pure.

“Suffering” is threefold:

a. Suffering as the apprehended, which is the basis of the apprehension and attachment of the two kinds of grasping at self and dharmas.

b. Suffering as phenomenal characteristics, namely the characteristics of the three kinds of suffering.

c. Suffering as conjunction, in which suffering is conjoined with suffering.

“Emptiness” is threefold:

a. Emptiness as the absence of nature, because its nature does not exist.

b. Emptiness as a different nature, because “emptiness” and “false apprehension” are two different natures.

c. Emptiness as intrinsic nature, taking that which is revealed by the two kinds of emptiness as its intrinsic nature.

“Non-self” is threefold:

a. Non-self as the absence of characteristics, because the characteristic of self does not exist.

b. Non-self as a different characteristic, because non-self differs from the falsely apprehended characteristic of self.

c. Non-self as intrinsic characteristic, namely the intrinsic characteristic revealed by non-self.

The “Truth of Origination” is threefold:

a. Origination as habitual tendencies, namely the apprehension of the habitual tendencies of the imagined nature. On the basis of attachment to those habitual tendencies, it is provisionally established as origination through habitual tendencies.

b. Origination through co-arising, namely karma and the afflictions.

c. Origination as not yet freed from bondage, namely suchness not yet separated from the hindrances.

The “Truth of Cessation” is threefold:

a. Cessation as intrinsic nature, namely the intrinsic nature of non-arising.

b. Cessation of the two apprehensions, namely analytical cessation, in which the two apprehensions no longer arise.

c. Cessation as fundamental nature, namely suchness.

The “Truth of the Path” is threefold:

a. The path of complete knowledge, which is able to know the imagined nature.

b. The path of permanent abandonment, which is able to eliminate the defiled aspect of the dependent nature.

c. The path of realization, which is able to realize the perfected nature. Nevertheless, the path of complete knowledge also encompasses the paths of permanent abandonment and realization.

The Truth of Suffering has four sets of three, the Truth of Origination has one set of three, the Truth of Cessation has one set of three, and the Truth of the Path has one set of three. Thus, the Four Truths together have seven sets of three, which are correlated in sequence with the three natures. Here, whether the three natures correlated with the Four Truths are provisional or real should be understood according to the principles involved.

– How are the objects of the three gates of liberation—emptiness, wishlessness, and signlessness—included within these three natures?

– In terms of ultimate principle, all three gates encompass all three natures; but according to their characteristics, each gate corresponds to one nature. Their correspondence in sequence should be understood thus: the “gate of emptiness” is established on the basis of the imagined nature; the “gate of wishlessness” is established on the basis of the dependent nature; and the “gate of signlessness” is established on the basis of the perfected nature. By taking these as objects, three kinds of tolerance regarding non-arising arise in turn: a. tolerance regarding non-arising by intrinsic nature; b. tolerance regarding natural non-arising; c. tolerance regarding the non-arising of afflictions and suffering. In sequence, these three natures are the objects of those three kinds of tolerance.

– How do these three natures include the two truths?

– It should be understood that the conventional truth comprises all three natures. The ultimate truth includes only the perfected nature.

The conventional truth is threefold: the provisional conventional, the active conventional, and the clearly revealed conventional. These should be understood as corresponding in sequence to the imagined, dependent, and perfected natures.

The ultimate truth is threefold:

a. The meaning of the ultimate, namely suchness, which is the meaning of the supreme.

b. The attainment that is ultimate, namely nirvana, in which the supreme itself is the meaning.

c. The practice that is ultimate, namely the Noble Path, in which the supreme is the meaning.

The ultimate is unchanging and undeluded; according to what is appropriate, all three are included within the perfected nature.

– By what wisdoms are these three natures known?

– The imagined nature is entirely not an object of wisdom. Because it has no intrinsic substance, it is not an objective condition. Yet with regard to the imagined nature, fools apprehend it as existent while Noble Ones comprehend it as nonexistent. Therefore, it may also be said to be an object of the wisdoms of fools and Noble Ones; as the object of both the ignorant and noble wisdoms, it belongs to the dependent nature. The perfected nature is solely the object of noble wisdom.

– Among these three natures, how many are provisional and how many are real?

– Because the imagined nature is established through false supposition, it is said to be “provisional.” Moreover, because it has no real substance or characteristic, it may also be said to be neither provisional nor real. Within the dependent nature, some things are real and some provisional. Aggregates (the physical world and the body with its faculties), continuities (the changing characteristics of minds and mental factors), and states (the twenty-four factors dissociated from mind) are said to exist provisionally; but minds, mental factors, and acquisition are said to exist really, because they arise in dependence upon conditions. If there were no provisional dharmas, real dharmas also could not be established. The provisional is posited in dependence upon the real. The perfected nature alone exists really, for it is not posited in dependence upon other conditions.

– Are these three natures different or not different from one another?

– It should be said that they are neither. Because they have no separate intrinsic substances, they are not different; yet because false apprehension (the imagined), dependent arising (the dependent), and true meaning (the perfected) are distinct, they are not nondifferent.

These three natures have exceedingly many meanings. For fear of prolixity, only their essential outline has been briefly presented.

(End of Fascicle Eight of the Chinese Text)